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.

 Lobukia wrote:


Wow, you just recommended BoLS Trolls as a nice place?! I disagree. Dakkadakka certainly isn't the answer to the question either, but I like it that way.

I'd recommend the ICs forums. Kind people, more focus on narrative play, tends to be positive... #tuttletime

http://www.theindependentcharacters.com/forums/

+1

The Independent Characters forum has a different culture than Dakka. It's much more positive and the mods play a role in keeping it positive. But, positivity can also stifle legitimate debate. Everything is not well in 40K Land, and although it's not good to only dwell on that aspect, it's also pretty damn hard to ignore.

Dakka has a rough edge at times, but you also can get some honest, thoughtful feedback and discussion from a really diverse group of hobbyists.

office_waaagh wrote:

Whether or not all is well in 40k land is a matter for debate. I don't see any problems, but I don't play in tournaments against taudar wave serpent spam or 2++ rerollable invisible daemon factories. The game is fun and the fluff is cool, and that's all I ask for. Now, people are going to disagree with me, and that's fine. But there's a tendency on dakka for certain people to ambush threads and denounce GW and 40k roundly, regardless of what the actual topic of discussion is, and spoil the atmosphere for people that really just want to talk about how much fun they're having. People get touchy, backs get up, and suddenly there's a wall of text three pages long about whether paying 5 points for a grot orderly makes you subhuman.

I think it's important to understand that Dakka is also pretty well delineated. I stay away from some of the sub-forums because they don't have value to me. You Make Da Call and Army Lists aren't useful because my friends and I can figure out rules on our own and I really don't care what someone thinks of my list building skills. And the Off-Topic sub-forum is full of liberal, anti-capitalist, pot-smoking douchetards that think that government handouts and more legislation is a-okay! Hee hee!

I kind of have a problem with the idea that we're a "diverse" group of hobbyists, to be honest. The fact that I know there are women out there (besides Sadie) that love 40k and won't come near a place like dakka for all the tea in China because of the hostility and negativity suggests otherwise. I'm not saying every forum has to be all-inclusive; people for whom 40k is srs bsns need a place to chat and vent their frustrations too. But it doesn't lead to a lot of diversity, and it drives other people away.

Wargaming is not a gender-diverse crowd. It never will be, I suspect. Just as the best professional athletes will be male, the best warfighters will be male. It's in our genes. That's not misogynistic, it simply IS. But, Dakka draws people from all over the world. That's the diversity I'm speaking of. European and Asian wargamers do have different perspectives to us New Worlders.

As for the negativity? Welcome to the Internet? You really can't control what some anon on a forum is going to say or do. Positive interactions are better had IRL.

office_waaagh wrote:

 the_Armyman wrote:
...the Off-Topic sub-forum is full of liberal, anti-capitalist, pot-smoking douchetards that think that government handouts and more legislation is a-okay! Hee hee!

Wargaming is not a gender-diverse crowd. It never will be, I suspect. Just as the best professional athletes will be male, the best warfighters will be male. It's in our genes. That's not misogynistic, it simply IS.

As for the negativity? Welcome to the Internet? You really can't control what some anon on a forum is going to say or do. Positive interactions are better had IRL.

I...don't really know how to respond to this. If...if you can't see how this is misogynistic, I don't know what to tell you. Except to humbly suggest that it is this sort of attitude that will keep wargaming from becoming gender-diverse. But this is a good example of the sort of thing she'd like to avoid. Needlessly insulting people ("douchetards" etc), saying that women can't be as good as men and that's just a reality that we have to accept, and saying that negativity is just the price of entry to the internet. Exactly what would make her leave a forum and never come back. A feeling I fully sympathize with.

The "hee hee" at the end of my "douchetards" comment was meant to be a j/k, poking fun comment. Next time I'll include the appropriate emoticon to drive the point home (see what I did there?)

See, here's the problem I have with this discussion. I point out a reality, a biological fact--men are genetically built to be physically stronger and faster --and somehow, I offend your sensibilities by bringing it up. By virtue of me being male, does that make me automatically physically superior to ALL women? Of course not. Wargaming is not an exclusively male pasttime, but it is dominated by males. You would say because they're excluded, they're not welcome by people like me. I would say that it is not a pursuit that interests women because they have not historically been interested in simulations of warfare. It historically has not been a part of their experience as a gender.

Women and men are different. They have different interests and different genetic predispositions. Are there exceptions? Yes. But these women are exceptions for a reason, just not the one you seem to be conditioned to point out.

BTW, I do find it kind strange that you refer to your wife as "sensitive" and portray her as this wilting flower that has difficulty with the adversity and potential negativity of an Internet forum. It's almost as if you consider her weak and wish to protect her from all of us male troglodytes. Are you sure you're not projecting a bit?

 jreilly89 wrote:

Yep. Womynz ain't strong enough wot to lift up and paint them tough metal minis. Dey's better off staying in da kitchen and making sandwiches, cuz they small fingers can make sandwichez faster.

Seriously, way too hold back the advancement of society, moron. Also, please don't drag science into your sexist view of reality.

So, I bring up that women and men are biologically different and have different aptitudes. From those points, you deduce that I must mean that women are too weak to pick up miniatures. If those are the type of rational conclusions you come up with, please put me on ignore. It is doubtful you and I can have a polite, intelligent conversation.