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.

LunaHound wrote:

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.

When is banning logically not an option?

ShumaGorath wrote:

LunaHound wrote:

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.

When is banning logically not an option?

Because banning is a last option. Whats wrong with a peaceful compromise before that last option?

LunaHound wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

LunaHound wrote:

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.

When is banning logically not an option?

Because banning is a last option. Whats wrong with a peaceful compromise before that last option?

Takes a lot longer.

But it is worth so much more.

Manchu wrote:But it is worth so much more.

And thus we're back to the problem of the soft touch.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Manchu wrote:But it is worth so much more.

And thus we're back to the problem of the soft touch.

As long as we're not on the problem of bad touch.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Manchu wrote:But it is worth so much more.

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?

LunaHound wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Manchu wrote:But it is worth so much more.

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.

ShumaGorath wrote:

LunaHound wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Manchu wrote:But it is worth so much more.

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?

Just let it die.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

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.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

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 YMDC IF 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.

@Manchu: Snark isn't the same as dbaggery.

I love to post snarky stuff.

My main antagonist on this board loves to post dbaggery.

There's a difference.

JohnHwangDD wrote:@Manchu: Snark isn't the same as dbaggery.

I love to post snarky stuff.

My main antagonist on this board loves to post dbaggery.

There's a difference.

Okay, I really want to see examples of this difference.

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.

malfred wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:@Manchu: Snark isn't the same as dbaggery.

I love to post snarky stuff.

My main antagonist on this board loves to post dbaggery.

There's a difference.

Okay, I really want to see examples of this difference.

Wasn't it George Carlin who asked: How come you gak is stuff and everyone else's stuff is gak?

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.

malfred wrote:Okay, I really want to see examples of this difference.

I can't see it being anything other than 'I post snark, you post douchebaggery'.

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.

This really cannot be emphasized enough.

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.

Hi Manchu

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!

Manchu wrote:

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.