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.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
He got banned on Warseer!

Anyone worth talking to have been banned from Warseer .

But I haven't gotten banned.

Probably because I rarely post there, but still.

Their ban list is huge. Likely larger than their active list. hats one of the issues the OP's wife will have trouble on many forums.
A forum will develop an "attitude' towards it's subject matter and it's most vocal and influential members will act in an aggressive manner towards anyone who does not follow the same train of thought. Much like extreme political party wing members.
Warseer is an ultra pro GW site so anyone who has the temerity to post anything negative gets "the treatment". Regardless of anything positive that they may also say.Here is mu the same only the polaity is reversed and itis aforum that is super highly critical and negative towards GW and it is those who ave an occasional positive comment who gets "the treatment".
People like myself who have both positive and negative comment to make about GW oft find ourselves on the outside wherever we go.
GW has had both good and bad times over the decades and ade both good and bad decisions. I is a com pany made up of human bengs.I give them credit were it is due but a also more thn willing to razz on them when they make a mistake.

I stick around several forums to talk about the game that has been a large part of y life since the 80s (early 80s in the case of roleplaying and D&D. I lurk more often than not just gathering information and learning (I constantly find myself learning new tidbits and advice in terms of game play and also about the rules) but will also post when I have an experience to share in hopes that it may help someone out.

Except Dakka doesn't ban people who say GW is alright. Its more of a smug pat on the head and a polite "thats nice"

Except Dakka doesn't ban people who say GW is alright. Its more of a smug pat on the head and a polite "thats nice"

condecending and patronising behaviors can be just as bad as total rejection in some cases.

epronovost wrote:
Except Dakka doesn't ban people who say GW is alright. Its more of a smug pat on the head and a polite "thats nice"

condecending and patronising behaviors can be just as bad as total rejection in some cases.

Combine that with "the treatment" and you have what was mentioned earlier.

But the thread is not designed to be a bash this site or bash that site thread and I apologize for adding to that topic. Know that anything I post on the subject is intended as constructive criticism. As I am not intending to incite a flame war, i have not posted links or "named names" (why am I suddenly reminded of a seinfeld episode lol). The past is the past and I offered the constructive criticism as others have done to try to help people look at their own actions (myself included) and help the place become more positive so that it could be welcoming to new people such as the OPs wife.

Loborocket wrote:
I think the mods here could do a better job on controlling the negativity, but that is just my opinion.

We could. But we don't. Because 'controlling' the negativity isn't our job.

Dakka is a venue for discussion. Free and open discussion doesn't happen if people aren't allowed to post their opinions.

We do what we can to control the way people choose to express that opinion where necessary, in an effort to keep things civil and on-track. But 'policing' opinions just because a segment of the community disagrees with them? That's not going to happen.

Exactly opinions should NOT be policed and I would be unhappy if they were. Differences of opinion are there because we are human. If we ALL had the same opinion, we would be nothing more than drones with a hive mind. The only thing that should be policed in that regard are the ways in which they are put forth in order to keep it polite and civil and ensure that everyone has the right to express theirs in a polite and civil fashion without having impolite and uncivil responses. I've seen many others besides myself display the the good example here and I give them definite props. There ARE good people here just as there are good people on all of the forums. It's just usually a few who give the different places a bad name and can cause a cloud of negativity.

 insaniak wrote:
We could. But we don't. Because 'controlling' the negativity isn't our job.

Dakka is a venue for discussion. Free and open discussion doesn't happen if people aren't allowed to post their opinions.

We do what we can to control the way people choose to express that opinion where necessary, in an effort to keep things civil and on-track. But 'policing' opinions just because a segment of the community disagrees with them? That's not going to happen.

The reason that I'm very hesitant to recommend dakka to her isn't because people have opinions that I or she might disagree with, and I hope that's not the idea that I've conveyed. But the characteristics of the dakka boards that I don't like and she wouldn't like are centred around when and how those opinions are expressed. I have observed a tendency for people to enter threads regardless of the topic being discussed and turn it into "GW can't write balanced rules because they're all stupid monsters etc", and it would really upset her to have a post she writes about how much she loves some new model or other get replied to by five people saying "the rules for it are bad and if you like it you should feel bad".

People here, with apologies for generalizing, tend to jump down each others' throats over relatively trivial disagreements. It is difficult to find a conversation thread of any significant length that doesn't get at least temporarily hijacked by two people or camps taking shots at each other; a particular incident from a couple of months ago sticks out in my memory during which a debate over the merits of a 5 point grot orderly got rather out of hand. It just started with one fellow saying his grot orderly saved his warboss and won him a game, and someone else replied that a grot orderly was a poor use of the points and he was foolish for taking it, and that if he was in a position to need it he was a poor tactician to boot. It escalated significantly from there. None of this was expressed in an overtly rude manner, but it was unmistakably confrontational and hostile in tone. No good faith or good will was presumed on behalf of either party. I seriously doubt either participant considered it a pleasant experience or really gained anything from the exchange. What started as a harmless anecdote about a grot orderly saving the day turned into a pretty vicious argument that nevertheless did not strictly speaking violate the forum rules.

Contrast this with most of the online groups she belongs to. If a similar situation arose, typical behaviour would be to either a) accept that someone has a different opinion and not think much of it, or b) offer a suggestion for improvement phrased as "hey, have you thought about *alternative proposal* instead? I tried it and it worked great! And it has *feature that recommends it as a superior option*. Let me know if it works for you!"

Thanks again for the suggestions everyone. She's joined the tyranids facebook group as well as the Overlords group, so if you're a member and you see a new member named Sadie please say "hi" and make her feel welcome! She's nervous about being in the "boys' space" so sending her a little love will really make her day.

Thanks again!

office_waaagh wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
We could. But we don't. Because 'controlling' the negativity isn't our job.

Dakka is a venue for discussion. Free and open discussion doesn't happen if people aren't allowed to post their opinions.

We do what we can to control the way people choose to express that opinion where necessary, in an effort to keep things civil and on-track. But 'policing' opinions just because a segment of the community disagrees with them? That's not going to happen.

The reason that I'm very hesitant to recommend dakka to her isn't because people have opinions that I or she might disagree with, and I hope that's not the idea that I've conveyed. But the characteristics of the dakka boards that I don't like and she wouldn't like are centred around when and how those opinions are expressed. I have observed a tendency for people to enter threads regardless of the topic being discussed and turn it into "GW can't write balanced rules because they're all stupid monsters etc", and it would really upset her to have a post she writes about how much she loves some new model or other get replied to by five people saying "the rules for it are bad and if you like it you should feel bad".

People here, with apologies for generalizing, tend to jump down each others' throats over relatively trivial disagreements. It is difficult to find a conversation thread of any significant length that doesn't get at least temporarily hijacked by two people or camps taking shots at each other; a particular incident from a couple of months ago sticks out in my memory during which a debate over the merits of a 5 point grot orderly got rather out of hand. It just started with one fellow saying his grot orderly saved his warboss and won him a game, and someone else replied that a grot orderly was a poor use of the points and he was foolish for taking it, and that if he was in a position to need it he was a poor tactician to boot. It escalated significantly from there. None of this was expressed in an overtly rude manner, but it was unmistakably confrontational and hostile in tone. No good faith or good will was presumed on behalf of either party. I seriously doubt either participant considered it a pleasant experience or really gained anything from the exchange. What started as a harmless anecdote about a grot orderly saving the day turned into a pretty vicious argument that nevertheless did not strictly speaking violate the forum rules.

Contrast this with most of the online groups she belongs to. If a similar situation arose, typical behaviour would be to either a) accept that someone has a different opinion and not think much of it, or b) offer a suggestion for improvement phrased as "hey, have you thought about *alternative proposal* instead? I tried it and it worked great! And it has *feature that recommends it as a superior option*. Let me know if it works for you!"

Thanks again for the suggestions everyone. She's joined the tyranids facebook group as well as the Overlords group, so if you're a member and you see a new member named Sadie please say "hi" and make her feel welcome! She's nervous about being in the "boys' space" so sending her a little love will really make her day.

Thanks again!

Insaniak, thanks for taking the time to respond. To bad about content of the response, "We could, but we don't." That is the problem with this forum, that exact attitude. I realize that is your and other mod decisions to make and not mine, but the OP, myself, and at least one other person posting to this thread think the "We could, but we don't" attitude from the mods makes this forum not as good as it could be.

I think the post above is a pretty good example of how things go in threads sometimes.

Perhaps my critisism about mods here not controlling the "negative" tone is not exactly what I mean. How about this for constructive critisism, using the above example from office_wagggh. The mods of this board could do a better job of keeping threads "civil and on track". In my opinion this is not the case way to often and it sets the wrong tone for the forum as a whole. It makes it feel negative an un-inviting for some users. So in the spirit of constructive critisism, "We could, but we don't" does not cut it for me. You SHOULD try harder. It WOULD make this forum a better place for the 40k community.

Its not the Mods job, nor should it be, to make sure everything is positive.

This forum is set up so everyone can disseminate their opinion, as long as they don't make personal attacks or violate other rules.

You're basically asking for Mods to stop people from hurting each others feelings. That is not only an impossible task, but its also a pointless one.

Loborocket wrote:
Insaniak, thanks for taking the time to respond. To bad about content of the response, "We could, but we don't." That is the problem with this forum, that exact attitude.

Really?

We could delete every second post made by randomly selected posters. We don't.

We could delete posts from anybody posting from a town with a name that starts with a 'C'. We don't.

We could delete any post that is critical of the site's moderation. We don't.

We could only allow people to post between the hours of 3 and 4 am, on a tuesday, while wearing a tshirt with Oreos glued to it. We don't.


There are any number of things that we could do that would actively discourage open discussion on these boards. Stifling people with a negative opinion of something that other people like is just one of those things.


Speaking as someone who has been a member on forums that squash people with a view different to that of the site's owners, I can say from experience that these are not the shiny, apple-scented places that you seem to expect.

Perhaps my critisism about mods here not controlling the "negative" tone is not exactly what I mean. How about this for constructive critisism, using the above example from office_wagggh. The mods of this board could do a better job of keeping threads "civil and on track". In my opinion this is not the case way to often and it sets the wrong tone for the forum as a whole. It makes it feel negative an un-inviting for some users. So in the spirit of constructive critisism, "We could, but we don't" does not cut it for me. You SHOULD try harder. It WOULD make this forum a better place for the 40k community.

Sure, if you change the claim, the response to the previous claim is suddenly unsatisfactory.

Here's the thing about the forum's 'negative tone': The conversation that takes place on this forum, insofar as it fits within the forum's posting rules, is dictated by you, the posters. Not by the moderation staff.

As I point out every time the 'negativity' issue rears its ugly head, if you want to see more positive discussion on the forums, all you have to do is engage in more positive discussion on the forums.


But the board having a 'negative tone' and posters lacking civility are two completely separate issues. If you're seeing posts that you feel are inappropriate, there are two likely possibilities - one is that we haven't seen them, and the other is that we don't think those particular posts are a problem.

For the former, some stuff slides simply because people don't bother to report them. We can't see every post in every thread... the site is just too big for that to be feasible. If more people just hit the yellow triangle instead of responding in kind, this wouldn't be as big an issue.

For the latter, well, different people have different opinions on just when the line into rudenessville has been crossed, and that opinion is quite often situational. That's a large part of why all moderator action is logged and reviewed by the other moderators... to make sure we're all drawing that line in more or less the same place. Whether or not you personally agree with where we choose to draw that line, well, that's another matter entirely.

At least for Daemons (and all things powerarmour) i can recommend Bolter&Chainsword. People there are very friendly. Not that Dakka is unfriendly (it certainly isnt!) but for somewhat more, erm, sensitive souls, B&C is a safe place

 insaniak wrote:
Whether or not you personally agree with where we choose to draw that line, well, that's another matter entirely.

Yes I think where the moderation team draws the line is in the wrong place. Take that for what it is worth.

Your lengthy response to me and the "tone" it seems to read with is a pretty good example of how Mod behavior contributes to the problem. You could have very easily NOT responded to my critisisim, or just simply said, "Thanks for the input, the moderation team will consider it." Instead you go on and on with hyperbolic examples of what you "could" do making my constructive input seem simply ridiculous and out of place.

To me this is a fine example of how moderation of this forum is not as good as it could be.

Simply starting off a response with "Really?" Is kind of rude.

So not only would you prefer anyone with something negative to say not post, you also want the mod team to be emotionless robots, who can't convey their own opinion on subjects? lolwat.

And apparently would prefer a cookie cutter response than someone take the time to explain not only the decision, but the process behind making the decision.

I will take the advice given in the thread and start flagging post I think are rude and cross the line and let the mods do what they will. I have not taken that action in the past but will start. At least it will start to let the moderation team know what I think crosses the line and then they can decide.

Every forum moderates differently, and frankly, that's a good thing.

I see posts on here that, if it were B&C or Necrontyr Online, I'd be smiting freely... but because that's not the culture on Dakka, because Dakka is a place for people to cut loose and share what they really feel without caring about anyone's personal feelings, I don't even bother reporting the mild cases... because people need somewhere like Dakka to air their grievances and argue each other in circles.

In that sense, the mod team do a great job of making sure it doesn't get too out of hand. Directed personal attacks are dealt with, after all, it's only the generalisations that happen to catch some dakkites in the blast radius that are let go.

 insaniak wrote:
Here's the thing about the forum's 'negative tone': The conversation that takes place on this forum, insofar as it fits within the forum's posting rules, is dictated by you, the posters. Not by the moderation staff.

As I point out every time the 'negativity' issue rears its ugly head, if you want to see more positive discussion on the forums, all you have to do is engage in more positive discussion on the forums.

But the board having a 'negative tone' and posters lacking civility are two completely separate issues. If you're seeing posts that you feel are inappropriate, there are two likely possibilities - one is that we haven't seen them, and the other is that we don't think those particular posts are a problem.

To be clear, there is no criticism of the moderation of the boards here expressed or implied; that isn't my intent. As Insaniak correctly points out, if we all want a more civil and pleasant tone, then we should all start being more civil and pleasant. The mod staff do a difficult job, and among their many crosses to bear is that nobody will ever appreciate what they do because either way they are likely to make someone unhappy. It's a tough and thankless job that is done on a volunteer basis (I assume) by people out of genuine passion for the hobby and the community, and there is no "right answer" about where to draw the line between freedom of expression and protecting people from offense. Even if we don't agree with the moderation decisions, I hope we can all sympathize with the difficult position the mods are in; they are, after all, people too, just like us, and they do their best at a hard job, just like us.

I'll give another example of what I mean in my comment above, though, from another thread on this forum: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/632496.page#7534025

Martel732 wrote:

 EVIL INC wrote:
Think of it being akin to counting cards when you play blackjack (after all, your just doing the math to figure statistical probabilities). There is nothing written in the rules to stop you. So of course, the casinos in Vegas wont mind if you do it.

In my eyes, it goes against the spirit of the game. Of course, thats my opinion. Its one thing to eyeball it and figure "yeah, my guy doesnt stand a chance if he assaults this unit but he might do some damage oer there" and another to whip out the calculator. But if my opponent chooses to do so, thats up to them and I wont tell them they cant.

There is no spirit to this game other than the spirit of GW getting mad stacks of cash.

The topic of the thread is "Do statistics matter?". There is nothing that makes a reply of "GW sucks" a reasonable or appropriate response to the matter under discussion, and I assume we can predict where the thread will go from there. It's not that people have these opinions, or even that they express them. It's that they actively derail or redirect other conversations and ambush the people that are having a good time and just want to talk about the game. I don't mean to suggest that this is a mod issue necessarily, but it would be nice to find a place where it doesn't happen to hang out in. Don't get me wrong; when dakka is good, it's great, but the high chaff-to-wheat ratio on some of the sub-forums makes it hard to find those good bits sometimes.

In your given example, the best course of action for anyone involved is to report it via the yellow Triangle of Friendship, and subsequently ignore it (and perhaps also the poster via the Ignore function). The trouble begins when someone either reports it and subsequently starts picking at the thread the poster left before the report can be dealt with--often ending badly--or when someone doesn't report it and just picks away instead--often ending even more badly.

From my own point of view, were I a Mod, the example comment doesn't break any rules, and so I wouldn't exactly feel justified in swooping in. What I would hope happens instead is that people would see it's a discussion that would go nowhere and be completely unproductive, and they would ignore it. Unfortunately, that rarely happens, and so unless I watch the thread 24/7--which, being not only a volunteer, but also (mostly) human, I'd find difficult--I'd have to wait until someone brought something rule-breaking to my attention via PM or the report function. Similarly to above, however, I'd hazard a guess at saying it rarely happens when it should.

The only other option would be to post a general 'warning' that people should avoid dragging the thread off-topic, but having been here for over 4 years, I've seen that those warnings are all too often ignored.

Outside of that, it's up to the denizens of the forum to choose whether or not they're going to be civil. Moderation is very much a reactive action, and for all the flak the mods receive, at the very basic level, it's down to how the members of the community behave. There would be no cause to criticise mods for how they do their job if their job didn't need to be done in the first place.

I think anyone can come to Dakka's 40k community and have a good time. There are just a couple of things I would avoid:

1) Getting too caught up in "You Make da Call"- that place is something like the British House of Parliament arguing over laws, it can get very aggressive and people have strong opinions on the rules.

2) Posting in 40k tactics without the proper knowledge on a topic. People get called out on a topic, but it's usually because they're wrong about some part of the details. Sometimes, it goes back to interpretation and you go back to (1), but a lot of times it's because poster made generalizations that frustrate other people. To me, that's fine, people should be called when they say wrong things and should make sure that what they're posting pertaining is accurate. I have certainly learned a lot about being properly informed before making points.

3) Siding one way or the other over the state of 40k and GW- this one is more contentious. 40k has been going through what I consider to be a significant upheaval in the customer base due to a lot of the decisions the company has made for the game. This includes pricing and rules significantly, and obviously there is a lot of passion that goes into this topic because of all the work people have put into their armies. As long as you don't engage in this topic, then you're particularly fine. This of course swings both ways, some posters like to go on about how 40k is the best thing since sliced bread while others feel that it's a honking mess. But if you don't engage this topic one way of the other, you won't have trouble.

Dakka overall is a great board, I don't find it any more rough and tumble than any other place on the internet. And it's popular because people are free to express their thoughts and feelings about topics however they choose, providing of course they refrain from insulting others. The mods here are great about giving topics their breadth so they can breathe and run their course, and only apply the brakes when things swing wildly. I think these things are big reasons why Dakka is one of the biggest wargaming (40k included!) forums out there.

I think Dakka Dakka is an amazing place of freedom and discussion, but that's not without its cost. For more freedom, there is always the chance of negativity. I think the mods do a good job, stepping in only when truly necessary, even if its just a "Hey, guys, remember to keep it down." I've even had to PM some mods privately and report other users when they've crossed the line, and the mods have always treated it quickly and fairly.

 DarkLink wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:

 EVIL INC wrote:

I'd suggest staying offline altogether lol. There is only one site I've seen to fit the bill in terms of being friendly and welcoming to everyone and thats Bell of Lost Souls. Some of the facebook groups re also pretty good. The Overlords is pretty good there.

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/

Kinda funny to hear someone on Dakka criticize BoLS for troll behavior... though I guess if you're referring to BoLS frontpage rather than the forums, it would make sense.

The BoLS forums are probably about as female friendly as you can get. Not only are a number of top posters openly female, but there are several running threads on feminism and lgbt issues in the off-topic. Granted, if you're a guy, and you say anything that could remotely be construed as theoretically possibly being sexist in some conceivable way, Eldargal will flame the gak out of you, but her ire is only directed at guys. Or white people, I guess, if it's about a race issue like Ferguson, but even then it's really only white guys... huh, I kinda do see what you mean about trolls .

I feel like if you spend time in any off-topic forum these days you're going to find the social justice trolls. Heck, they troll up General Discussion and Background any chance they get. Everything is a battle for those kinds of people though, and if they can't find one, they'll make one.

Such is the Interwebs though. I said this almost fifteen years ago, and it's even more true now than it was back then. The Internet has given any idiot a voice, and every idiot has chosen to use it.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
... because Dakka is a place for people to cut loose and share what they really feel without caring about anyone's personal feelings...

That's not actually what Dakka is about at all. Hence Rule #1.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

office_waaagh wrote:
The topic of the thread is "Do statistics matter?". There is nothing that makes a reply of "GW sucks" a reasonable or appropriate response to the matter under discussion,... .

Well, yes and no. In context, someone responding to a comment about the ' spirit of the game ' with their opinion on said ' spirit ' is, while not strictly on topic with the main discussion, an on -topic response to the statement just made.

In those sorts of cases, we would generally leave it alone unless it was rude or particularly inflammatory, and would just post a request to get back on topic if the thread wanders off on that tangent while there is still discussion available on the original topic.

Threads do often wander around through several different topics, and we also like to allow a certain amount of freedom for people to have fun with the discussion (so an occasional ' joke ' post is acceptable even if it's slightly off -topic, so long as it doesn't de-rail the thread).

It's easy to look at a thread afterwards and say ' yeah, the mods should have stepped in right there '... assuming any of the mods are even online and looking at that thread at the time... But it's not always as simple to look at a single post and predict the sort of response it will trigger. We're human, and sometimes we get it wrong... but that doesn't mean we're endorsing the ensuing nonsense, just that in that particular instance, with the benefit of hindsight, that thread should have been more closely watched.

At the end of the day, though, the general tone of the forum is not something that the mods can control. Not without some fairly heavy -handed application of censorship... At which point we would be getting criticised for not letting people speak their minds.

As someone who mods on another (albeit smaller than it used to be board) modding is a giant pain in the ass. There is a lot that goes on behind the scenes and often discussions on what should or shouldn't be allowed will occur. Considering Dakka's size I've always felt that the mod team does a pretty good job handling it all around.

That said, even if they wanted to steer the board towards being more positive (without resorting to Soviet Russia levels of censorship) the user base will ultimately determine the tone of the board. And if the users don't like the tone they find another place to visit.

And OP, and I mean this in the nicest possible way my former-Army self can say it (and if it still sounds rude, I apologize, I'm used to explaining things to grunts and swearing a lot more): honestly your SO is an adult. And as such at some point you need to let her take that step out into the frightening reality that the internet isn't always the nicest place on earth. And if she can't handle even the slightest bit of negativity then the internet isn't the place for her.

Either she needs to take that risk and try some places out, or at least look around and see what she likes, or probably not bother with the internet. There isn't really a lot of middle ground on this kind of thing. Either she'll be tough enough to handle the occasional jerk or she won't be.

As someone who is an Internet forum regular in many places and on many different topics I have to say that IMO heavy-handed moderation doesn't work as intended.

Heavily moderated forums seem nicer places at first sight, but if you stick around long enough you usualky realize they're not really the best venues for free speech. A guy who posts against the general opinion of the forum often gets beaten down with sheer volume of disagreement, flaming, provocation and whatnot.Past a certain point it's difficult to neither pack up and leave or respond in kind. In a place with strict moderation this means most dissenting voices are silenced sooner rather than later.

As such, I prefer places like this one, where discussions are allowed to flow more freely.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
But I haven't gotten banned.

Do not worry, I trust in you. You will be able to make it!

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
I feel like if you spend time in any off-topic forum these days you're going to find the social justice trolls. Heck, they troll up General Discussion and Background any chance they get. Everything is a battle for those kinds of people though, and if they can't find one, they'll make one.

Such is the Interwebs though. I said this almost fifteen years ago, and it's even more true now than it was back then. The Internet has given any idiot a voice, and every idiot has chosen to use it.

A single manly tear is rolling down my cheek as I ponder the terrible burden those horrible people have put on you. And you have not yet killed a single one of them? You truly are a saint! I should build you a shrine.

As noted, the user base determines the tone of the board. If you want mods to make it a happier, cheerier place, then they have to censor people's opinions, which isn't good for anyone.

Dakka does a great job of allowing users to do their thing while maintaining civility without being overly intrusive or absent.. Similarly, the comments regarding Warseer are notably out of line, I've been posting there for going on nine years now, I've done things that got mod attention, and in those cases in hindsight I can probably say I was out of line and the Mod's actions were reasonable.

If you want an example of a micro-managed board with extensive levels of mod interaction, they exist, but the Mods in such cases are often the least pleasant and most disuptive members, and they tend to be far more hostile to certain views and content than a board like this. Again, if you want such an exmaple, the Reddit warhammer board will show exactly what I mean, with routine public mod drama that far outstrips anything Dakka has ever seen, with subscribing population 1/3rd that of Dakka's.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
And OP, and I mean this in the nicest possible way my former-Army self can say it (and if it still sounds rude, I apologize, I'm used to explaining things to grunts and swearing a lot more): honestly your SO is an adult. And as such at some point you need to let her take that step out into the frightening reality that the internet isn't always the nicest place on earth. And if she can't handle even the slightest bit of negativity then the internet isn't the place for her.

Either she needs to take that risk and try some places out, or at least look around and see what she likes, or probably not bother with the internet. There isn't really a lot of middle ground on this kind of thing. Either she'll be tough enough to handle the occasional jerk or she won't be.

My friend, you need not fear offending me with bluntness - I've been an infanteer (we don't say "infantryman" in Canada anymore, incidentally) for nearly thirteen years now. The army reserves have paid for nearly all of my ten-plus years of education at the small cost of four months per year and a free trip to the desert with a machine gun (yaaay Kandahar...). I've been on the receiving and delivering end of many an "explanation" and I've developed a pretty thick skin.

I hope that I'm not giving the impression that I've decided for her that dakka isn't going to be a good place for her, or that I'm speaking on her behalf. We're reading the thread together, and she reads my responses before I post them. I'm just writing the posts for consistency of language and tone, to avoid confusion, and because I already have an account on the site.

She's a well-seasoned traveller of the internet, as well - she has a blog, she's on twitter, Facebook, and a variety of other social websites and forums. But her blog is about her career and the people that read it are mostly professional translators, and that accounts for most of her twitter interactions as well. Facebook tends to keep things civil since most people use their real names. It's not like she unaware that people can be mean on the internet; she'd just like to avoid people being mean to her where possible. The idea that putting up with abuse is just the price of entry to the internet is mistaken, I think; none of the other forums or groups she belongs to has a culture that accepts that sort of thing. Dakka may be one of the nicer wargaming forums out there, or "male-dominated geek-subject" forums in general (pardon the expression), but by the standards of most hobby or craft groups it's a bit more on the "angrily denouncing each other" side than she is looking for.

She expressed some of her reservations to me yesterday (on our way to GW, actually) along the lines of "what if they all laugh at me for asking stupid questions?", "what if they think I'm a poser or a 'fake geek girl'?", "what if this is where they come to get away from their wives/girlfriends and I'm spoiling their safe place for them?", etc. But she's started posting a little bit on the tyranids Facebook page, and she's slowly working her courage up to creating a dakka account so she can at least check out the P&M forums. Thank you once again to everyone for all the helpful suggestions and interesting comments.

 insaniak wrote:

Loborocket wrote:
I think the mods here could do a better job on controlling the negativity, but that is just my opinion.

We could. But we don't. Because 'controlling' the negativity isn't our job.

Dakka is a venue for discussion. Free and open discussion doesn't happen if people aren't allowed to post their opinions.

We do what we can to control the way people choose to express that opinion where necessary, in an effort to keep things civil and on-track. But 'policing' opinions just because a segment of the community disagrees with them? That's not going to happen.

Clearly drunk on power!

As noted, Not a single person here cares if they are disagreed with. Differences of opinion are not even art of the equation. what IS being discussed is the behavior of the people who are disagreeing.
A poster can disagree with someone by just making a post that shows their opinion. Anyone who reads both posts will plainly be able to see the difference of opinion and the 2 separate people whose opinions differ do not need to even interact at all.
What we are talking about is the impolite and rude confrontations and baiting, sniping and so forth which break rule #1 of the site itself (or combinations f the rules including spam by posting insulting pictures and other non-topic posts). THIS is what needs to be addressed. Just because the one breaking the rules shares the same opinion as the mod on whatever gaming issue is being "discussed" should not mean that the person breaking rule #1 should get away with the behavior. Nor should it mean that when the person who holds the differing opinion on the gaming issue and is actually following the rules mentions that he thinks the behavior breaks rule #1 have action taken against him for politely posting his opinion on that separate topic while the instigator gets off scott free chalking up another successful campaign.