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.

nectarprime wrote:Are we talking about mod hypocrisy? OK, I'm gonna bring this up:

Remember that guy who made awesome tank conversions that included parts that were recast from GW scenery? Everything was fine until someone who will remain nameless forced the mods to do something by constantly complaining. This user even baited the mods in by posting pictures of his own recasts that were painted.
Anyway, the awesome guy who made the sickest tanks I had ever seen left after removing his pics. Really pissed me off, one jealous user had to ruin everyone's good time.
You can see that thread here: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/384577.page

Yet this thread, where a guy is blatantly recasting Squat exo armor, is still fine. http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/60/357761.page
So it's ok if someone doesn't make a big stink about it, apparently.

That really grinds my gears, and is one of the reasons I am looking for a different forum to start posting on.
Sorry if this went off topic :/

If no-one flags it, then sometimes threads can escape attention. It may surprise you to know this but Mods are human too and don't spend every waking hour patrolling the forum, nor every minute reading every new thread - stuff does escape their attention.

Thanks for responding Filbert. I do not appreciate the tone I perceived from your post, as I have already reported it in the past, and could not report it again. Obviously I know mods don't see everything, but I had reported it, isn't someone supposed to look at it then? I've reported things and had a mod act within minutes, yet this post sat untouched for over a week I believe since I reported it. I did not want to post in the thread just to complain about them recasting, when the users are making nice models and having fun.

I just want to add that I mean no disrespect whatsoever, I really appreciate the stuff you guys do for the forum.

@nectarprime

(1) someone posted cool recasts, someone else reported the thread to your annoyance, mods locked it, recaster left Dakka, and you're pissed because that user left with his pics?

(2) someone else posted cool recasts, YOU reported them, the mods did not lock it, the recaster did not leave, and you're pissed because the mods are inconsistent?

If I've understood this correctly, you're an excellent example of how some users are impossible to please.

Why don't you stick to reporting bad/offensive behaviour instead of policing the internets? What the guy is doing in his thread isn't hurting other members or bullying, and this is a thread about respecting other users.

The only things I've reported are those which are grossly offensive. Well, actually I think I've 'reported' more of my own posts over the last few years because I've put them in the wrong section.

I'm not gonna waste my time arguing. Funny how you see it Manchu, as me being "impossible to please". I just wanted to bring this to the attention of the mods, as reporting it did not do anything. Sorry if I ruffled some feathers, I did not mean to do that. It doesn't make me "pissed", just kind of annoying when there are inconsistencies like that on Dakka.

Manchu wrote:@nectarprime

(1) someone posted cool recasts, someone else reported the thread to your annoyance, mods locked it, recaster left Dakka, and you're pissed because that user left with his pics?

(2) someone else posted cool recasts, YOU reported them, the mods did not lock it, the recaster did not leave, and you're pissed because the mods are inconsistent?

If I've understood this correctly, you're an excellent example of how some users are impossible to please.

To be fair, from a locking/not locking standpoint then yes, he has a point regardless of his personal annoyance.

Yeah, it seems to me that a person could be both upset with a policy, and with an inconsistent application of that policy.

Just to point out that this thread wasn't intended as a MOD bashing thread - it was brought up to highlight respect between users and how some think they can shout others down just because they have a "louder internet voice".

People will always disagree with the mod's, in the same way that people disagree with their police forces / *insert other example here*

Manchu wrote:@nectarprime

(1) someone posted cool recasts, someone else reported the thread to your annoyance, mods locked it, recaster left Dakka, and you're pissed because that user left with his pics?

(2) someone else posted cool recasts, YOU reported them, the mods did not lock it, the recaster did not leave, and you're pissed because the mods are inconsistent?

If I've understood this correctly, you're an excellent example of how some users are impossible to please.

Might I make a small suggestion here, this is the type of response the original poster is talking about. You posted facts about how the replier is referencing somewhat conflicts points of view. However your response of "you're an excellent example of how some users are impossible to please." can be taken as provoking a flame war / fight. I may be overstepping my bounds, but as a MOD aren't you responsible to be more neutral and try to not provoke and instigate?

I think nectarprime, has some valid points to how he is affected by Dakka / policies. Why as a poster can he not render his opinion as he see's it? What is false about that?

njpc wrote:

Manchu wrote:@nectarprime

(1) someone posted cool recasts, someone else reported the thread to your annoyance, mods locked it, recaster left Dakka, and you're pissed because that user left with his pics?

(2) someone else posted cool recasts, YOU reported them, the mods did not lock it, the recaster did not leave, and you're pissed because the mods are inconsistent?

If I've understood this correctly, you're an excellent example of how some users are impossible to please.

Might I make a small suggestion here, this is the type of response the original poster is talking about. You posted facts about how the replier is referencing somewhat conflicts points of view. However your response of "you're an excellent example of how some users are impossible to please." can be taken as provoking a flame war / fight. I may be overstepping my bounds, but as a MOD aren't you responsible to be more neutral and try to not provoke and instigate?

I think nectarprime, has some valid points to how he is affected by Dakka / policies. Why as a poster can he not render his opinion as he see's it? What is false about that?

It's been my experience that the moderation team does not like to explain themselves, much less admit fault.

When I'm charitable, I understand that it's a natural reaction to being a small cadre of unpaid community members putting with endless amounts of petty forum drama. When I'm not, well...

@nectarprime: I just want to know what the substance of the complaint is: "don't do X because X is bad" or "do X every time even if it is bad"? Furthermore, your perspective seems to be that there was nothing to distinguish the two situations while the moderation team might have seen distinctions and so treated the situations differently. I see a complaint like yours (that the moderation is biased, or slack, or too heavy-handed, or inconsistent, and on and on) and I honestly don't see much merit.

@njpc: No one is limiting the ability of any user to "render their opinion" nor did I post (or even imply) that nectarprime's opinion is "false" (whatever that could mean). Don't forget that this is a dialog: when someone gives their opinion, others will respond with their own views -- even moderators. Nectarprime conveyed his point in a self-contradictory fashion that leads me to believe there is no solution to his frustration -- if threads about recasting are locked, he will be irritated; if threads about recasting are left open, he will be irritated.

Here's a reminder to all of you: moderators are also users. We browse the threads and take part in discussions like all other users -- the difference is that we volunteer some of the time we'd otherwise spend just enjoying the site to try and make sure the largest number of other users possible can also enjoy it. Don't forget that moderators have opinions and also participate in discussions here.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Polonius wrote:It's been my experience that the moderation team does not like to explain themselves, much less admit fault.

I have many, many PMs in my inbox and outbox from and to you that would beg to differ.

A genuine question / suggestion Manchu, do you think it would help to defuse some of these feelings that other users are having if the mods had personal accounts without the mod tag? That way it would be clearer that a mod were putting their own view across and not an official dakka ruling...

It's easy to know when 'an official Dakka ruling' is being made.

They purposely color the text red(or in Manchu's case, orange) so that it's eyecatching and very noticeable.

Fair point buddy, just tryna think outside the box. I think it'd the mod tag that may mislead people to think that every post is an official ruling.

kitch102 wrote:A genuine question / suggestion Manchu, do you think it would help to defuse some of these feelings that other users are having if the mods had personal accounts without the mod tag? That way it would be clearer that a mod were putting their own view across and not an official dakka ruling...

That is a good point. Some of us try to use colored text. I myself abandoned SCARY RED for friendly orange. Colored text or not, users don't always distinguish. One of the downsides to being a mod is that people treat you pretty differently. Some people seem to think that usually means "with more respect" but it's more often "with constant skepticism and criticism."

Manchu wrote:@nectarprime: I just want to know what the substance of the complaint is: "don't do X because X is bad" or "do X every time even if it is bad"? Furthermore, your perspective seems to be that there was nothing to distinguish the two situations while the moderation team might have seen distinctions and so treated the situations differently. I see a complaint like yours (that the moderation is biased, or slack, or too heavy-handed, or inconsistent, and on and on) and I honestly don't see much merit.

@njpc: No one is limiting the ability of any user to "render their opinion" nor did I post (or even imply) that nectarprime's opinion is "false" (whatever that could mean). Don't forget that this is a dialog: when someone gives their opinion, others will respond with their own views -- even moderators. Nectarprime conveyed his point in a self-contradictory fashion that leads me to believe there is no solution to his frustration -- if threads about recasting are locked, he will be irritated; if threads about recasting are left open, he will be irritated.

Here's a reminder to all of you: moderators are also users. We browse the threads and take part in discussions like all other users -- the difference is that we volunteer some of the time we'd otherwise spend just enjoying the site to try and make sure the largest number of other users possible can also enjoy it. Don't forget that moderators have opinions and also participate in discussions here.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Polonius wrote:It's been my experience that the moderation team does not like to explain themselves, much less admit fault.

I have many, many PMs in my inbox and outbox from and to you that would beg to differ.

Thanks for taking the time to respond to my concerns. If you would be so kind to explain what the differences are between recasting the tank stuff and recasting the squat stuff, that would be great. Both are GW IP.

I will admit in being wrong in that I did not want to see those awesome tank conversions go away, even though they were illegal. But this means that I can't complain about other recast stuff? Even if I have seen the error of my ways? I understand now why threads about recasting are locked. So, uh, why isn't that squat thread locked? Or had the pics removed?

You seem focused on how my complaint is contradictory to posts I have made in the past. This is besides the real point.

Maybe I'm just a demented seer, but am I the only one that still sees pictures in that thread concerning the recast tank conversions?

Manchu wrote:Some people seem to think that usually means "with more respect" but it's more often "with constant skepticism and criticism."

Perhaps you just haven't found the right colour to post modly things in... I'm sure this would make excellent research...

Manchu wrote:

kitch102 wrote:A genuine question / suggestion Manchu, do you think it would help to defuse some of these feelings that other users are having if the mods had personal accounts without the mod tag? That way it would be clearer that a mod were putting their own view across and not an official dakka ruling...

That is a good point. Some of us try to use colored text. I myself abandoned SCARY RED for friendly orange. Colored text or not, users don't always distinguish. One of the downsides to being a mod is that people treat you pretty differently. Some people seem to think that usually means "with more respect" but it's more often "with constant skepticism and criticism."

Agreed - you may as well replace the mod tag with "GOD" and take all the love / hate / admiration / condemnation that comes with that Something that is obviously Manchu without the suit (to coin a name and phrase, not picking on you specifically ) may help to really hammer it home that yourviews are your own and not that of the site as a whole.

Lt. Coldfire wrote:Maybe I'm just a demented seer, but am I the only one that still sees pictures in that thread concerning the recast tank conversions?

Nah, I can see pictures - very strange...

It seemed to me you were saying that the first thread should not have been closed (i.e., we drove away a good user) on the one hand and that the second thread should have been (but what about driving away good users?) on the other -- so I don't think the contradiction is really beside the point. It's inherent to the point you were originally making. You're current point seems to be that closing the first thread was correct so the second thread should have been closed, as well.

TBH, I can't explain the difference between two threads that I never saw and don't have access to right now. I will say that some mods are much more strict about that sort of things than others. I have left cool plogs open that had a bit of recasting (with modification) in them; in those cases, recasting was not really the point of the thread and nobody rushed in to derail the thread with an argument about it. If that happened, I'd probably just delete that person's posts and send them a PM saying I appreciated the sentiment (and possibly modalerts) but would prefer that not go off topic in someone's plog. Perhaps that amounts to a double-standard; or perhaps that's taking this sort of thing exactly as seriously as it should be. OTOH, I don't give any leeway to people who post or request illegal copies of GW or other publications. I can't see any merit in that at all.

One key difference was the one thread explained in detail how he created his press-molded GW parts.
And had a user harping on it every couple posts.

The other kind of glossed over what he did, did not describe how he did it, and moved on.

The first, with its pictures and details was much more likely to get Dakka in trouble, and that is a bigger concern for the mod team than appearing inconsistent.

At least that is my take on it.

Personally I think Dakka is a much tamer place than it was even 5 years ago.
When Mauleed, and Abadabadoon (or however he spells it), Bugswarm, and others were active, there were many threads that were just shy of outright name-calling that were quite fun to read, but made Dakka look like a very rough place for those used to Warseer, or Portent before that.
It was a marked difference to me how fast Stelek was removed, but then I mostly read News & Warmachine.

Manchu wrote:

TBH, I can't explain the difference between two threads that I never saw and don't have access to right now. I will say that some mods are much more strict about that sort of things than others. I have left cool plogs open that had a bit of recasting (with modification) in them; in those cases, recasting was not really the point of the thread and nobody rushed in to derail the thread with an argument about it. If that happened, I'd probably just delete that person's posts and send them a PM saying I appreciated the sentiment (and possibly modalerts) but would prefer that not go off topic in someone's plog. Perhaps that amounts to a double-standard; or perhaps that's taking this sort of thing exactly as seriously as it should be. OTOH, I don't give any leeway to people who post or request illegal copies of GW or other publications. I can't see any merit in that at all.

Yup, I didn't want tank dude to have to take down his pics. Sucks that he had to. I admitted that this POV of mine goes against Dakka rules. Yet I abide by these rules when I am here. As a law abiding citizen my complaints should have merit. If Squat dude is allowed to post pictures of his recasts, which is against Dakka rules, can Tank dude come back and repost his pics? No? WHY.

I linked both of those threads in my first post in this thread, and both are still open.

What I put in bold is EXACTLY what happened in the Tank dude thread. One guy going off topic over and over until the mods had to act.

Edit: keep in mind that all pics showing recast GW stuff were removed from the tank thread, but there are still other pics there.

I'd rather not get on the mod's bad list, so I'm going to stop my posting there, as I have had my say. If you see it as me being contradictory, that is fine. Myself and others see it otherwise.

Well in reference to "Tank Dude" he was blatantly coping multiple GW items and really copying whole sides of LRs and disguising it with his molds. They were cool, and inspiration but there is such a thing as too far. He could have easily taken a minute to spray primer over his reproductions and no one would have been the wiser.

In the general scheme of mtgs thread Dakka members and wargamers in general tend to be snarky, and less than what might be considered polite. The real problem is when someone takes something that is clearly joke far to seriously. Or better yet applying thier own overbearing morality to someone elses worldview. Generally referred to as "political correctness"
The lack of respect and general rudeness has to do with the lack of physicality the Internet and even modern law and order provide. If one of us snarkers stood the chance of receiving a well and true ass whooping by voicing our rather inflammatory opinions, we might hold them back. A violent society tends to be a rather polite society.
Then there is the ever present village idiot. Before the Internet every village only had to deal with it's own idiot, now we all have to deal with every villages idiot( and it may even be us!)

Manchu wrote:It seemed to me you were saying that the first thread should not have been closed (i.e., we drove away a good user) on the one hand and that the second thread should have been (but what about driving away good users?) on the other -- so I don't think the contradiction is really beside the point. It's inherent to the point you were originally making. You're current point seems to be that closing the first thread was correct so the second thread should have been closed, as well.

TBH, I can't explain the difference between two threads that I never saw and don't have access to right now. I will say that some mods are much more strict about that sort of things than others. I have left cool plogs open that had a bit of recasting (with modification) in them; in those cases, recasting was not really the point of the thread and nobody rushed in to derail the thread with an argument about it. If that happened, I'd probably just delete that person's posts and send them a PM saying I appreciated the sentiment (and possibly modalerts) but would prefer that not go off topic in someone's plog. Perhaps that amounts to a double-standard; or perhaps that's taking this sort of thing exactly as seriously as it should be. OTOH, I don't give any leeway to people who post or request illegal copies of GW or other publications. I can't see any merit in that at all.

How about: "If a situation arises that requires closing a thread, then that situation should always require closing the thread."?

I know logic can be hard. But consistency is important. Maybe not to the insiders. But to the rest of us, it is. It might also help (slightly) with Dakkas reputation. (not that it seems to matter much).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nectarprime wrote:

Manchu wrote:

TBH, I can't explain the difference between two threads that I never saw and don't have access to right now. I will say that some mods are much more strict about that sort of things than others. I have left cool plogs open that had a bit of recasting (with modification) in them; in those cases, recasting was not really the point of the thread and nobody rushed in to derail the thread with an argument about it. If that happened, I'd probably just delete that person's posts and send them a PM saying I appreciated the sentiment (and possibly modalerts) but would prefer that not go off topic in someone's plog. Perhaps that amounts to a double-standard; or perhaps that's taking this sort of thing exactly as seriously as it should be. OTOH, I don't give any leeway to people who post or request illegal copies of GW or other publications. I can't see any merit in that at all.

Yup, I didn't want tank dude to have to take down his pics. Sucks that he had to. I admitted that this POV of mine goes against Dakka rules. Yet I abide by these rules when I am here. As a law abiding citizen my complaints should have merit. If Squat dude is allowed to post pictures of his recasts, which is against Dakka rules, can Tank dude come back and repost his pics? No? WHY.

I linked both of those threads in my first post in this thread, and both are still open.

What I put in bold is EXACTLY what happened in the Tank dude thread. One guy going off topic over and over until the mods had to act.

Edit: keep in mind that all pics showing recast GW stuff were removed from the tank thread, but there are still other pics there.

I'd rather not get on the mod's bad list, so I'm going to stop my posting there, as I have had my say. If you see it as me being contradictory, that is fine. Myself and others see it otherwise.

It's been pretty much the same in other threads, especially Sisters of Battle threads. Out come the same trolls that roll their troll until they get what they want (a locked thread). And it's been consistently tolerated (if not outright encouraged).

Part of why Dakka has the reputation is has.

Worglock, I notice that you like to respond to ongoing conversations with inflammatory but unsubstantial remarks. You're very consistent in that respect, so I understand why you would emphasize consistency at the expense of reality in your approach to logic. Yes, logic can be hard -- but not too hard, after all. Situations are treated similarly to the extent that they are similar and differently to the extent that they are different. In nectarprime's case, his desire for consistency was countermanded by his opposing desires: that OP in one case be let alone and OP in another be sanctioned. The only real trouble, at least until he changed his mind about it in this thread, was that the outcome he desired was opposite that which actually occurred. The concept of consistency is an ex post facto rationalization in this case. I'm not saying his current viewpoint is not legitimate -- I think it's very legitimate in contrast to his original one.

Manchu, is your avatar a Judge Dredd helmet?

Yep -- from here: http://judgeminty.blogspot.com/

Cool. thanks for the url.

nectarprime wrote:What I put in bold is EXACTLY what happened in the Tank dude thread. One guy going off topic over and over until the mods had to act.

The mods didn't act because one guy kicked up a fuss. A mod acted on it because he personally thought the thread crossed a line.

Where an issue with a thread isn't an instantly suspendable offense, it's very much down to the personal interpretation of the mod who winds up fielding it. If an issue becomes enough of a problem, we'll discuss it and develop a more unified response to it... but until that point, there's not really a need. Nor is it possible to have a single, consistent response to every single issue that may arise on the boards. Not until we can replace all of the mods with robots. The mods are all human, with their own methods of dealing with issues.

And yes, that may result in some threads being locked and other similar threads not. Ultimately, that's not really that big an issue. A thread lock does not automatically include any sort of censure against the poster who started that thread.

Recasting is a tricky issue, because the legal ramifications are so very fuzzy. Dakka has to not appear to endorse recasting, for obvious reasons... but exactly what that means in terms of thread censure is an ongoing matter of discussion amongst the mod team, and our approach to it may well vary in different situations as a result.

I'm climbing out of 'passive sensor sweep mode' on free to view dakka to join into this fascinating premice of a thread that has turned whine fest about moderation.

And I'll keep the dreaded red colour away as this is from a personal perspective as user and a moderator, and not from a 'this needs to be moderated' perspective.

Some history.
When I joined 11 and a half years ago there was just as much trolling (proportionally) then as there is now.
However traffic was much less, users understood the personality of almost every other user (due to the small numbers) and personality conflicts (whilst impressive) tended to be between individual users. Also there was a much respected and utilised system of self moderation by users where new clown shoe acting users were quickly explained as to what the appropriate posting behaviour was on dakka.

These days there is a huge volume of traffic (so the mods will miss stuff, and why we rely on regular users to do alerts), I occasionally will stumble over a user with >1000 posts and cannot recall anything about them or their posting style, which as a moderator who is a daily dakka user makes me imagine that users who are on only occasionally have less of a sense of community than there once was.
I said recently in the Mod forum that the DCM Mosh pit is the only part of dakka where I am overtly active in posting anymore, because it is much smaller, the sense of community is much better defined. The same problems that occur on regular dakka occur there, but the users there are able to respond better and more constructively as we all 'know each other'.

Help us help you - hit the alert button. It may not end up with the result that you deem fit. But hopefully it will be the right one for dakka, understanding that >90% of moderation/warnings/suspensions/cleaning up threads or posts is done via PM or behind the scenes.
The best moderation is that which doesn't involve drama.

Countless times dakka has been praised for the more relaxed approach to moderation. People (at least used to) say that they get away with stuff here that would have been a perma-ban on warseer or B&C.
Occasionally we get attacked for overmoderating, usually by users who should go back and read the rules for dakka, and then decide if it is really the place they should be.

I'll be hitting 40,000 posts tonight.
You don't stuff around puting that much time and energy into a website unless you think it is pretty damned good.


And kitch102, your first paragraph surprises me. I'm unsure as to why you thought you would be censured by the moderation team for what is a well thought out explanatory discussion topic.