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.

Seconded!

For the record, until GW comes out on the record as saying female Space Marines and/or Custodes are a thing, quite frankly, these discussion aren't worth the trouble they inevitably cause.

So until that time, enjoy talking about female Stormcast, and keep hoping for GW to...do something else different too.

But also keep expecting those other threads to get locked fairly quickly.

 Manchu wrote:
Well as anyone can see from this very thread, everyone thinks the "other side" gets a pass..

Indeed.

I've lost count of the number of times over the years I've received PMs from people on both sides of an argument accusing me of showing favouritism to the other side...

 insaniak wrote:
I've last count of the number of times over the years I've received PMs from people on both sides of an argument accusing me of showing favouratism to the other side...

Well, since you're at least communicating like this, it is easier to put it into perspective. I can see how that would be an issue.

I suppose the only thing to ask would be that you're equally fair and apply it across the board evenly. I don't remember exactly why the US Politics thread got closed, it was kinda awful- but it seemed that a lot of it got bad around the Election.

 insaniak wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
@Luciferian - The staff certainly errs to the lighter touch.

Now that's certainly an amusing claim. I can't even count the number of times I've seen trigger-happy mods locking threads or threatening people over minor issues (most of them ones I wasn't involved in personally) that didn't deserve any attention. If that's what counts as "erring to a lighter touch" I'd hate to see you guys get in a banning mood...

I think it's been fairly well established in past discussions that you have a very different opinion on what constitutes acceptable discussion to that of Dakka's administration.

Which is fine... Different people draw the line in different places. But if you think Dakka has heavy moderation, I can only speculate that you haven't frequented very many forums.

See, I wasn't even talking about rule #1 here. I'm talking about things like locking a thread with "off topic, locked, feel free to start a new thread". What is the point of that, besides showing off your ability to lock a thread?

But as for rule #1, I think the problem is nicely highlighted by the fact that someone who directly called me "the most toxic poster on the forum" last night and had it deleted (along with most of their other posts in the thread, including other rudeness) is still posting without even a 24 hour ban, while I can guarantee that if i had said the same thing I'd be banned now.

Peregrine, that is a great example of the lack of self-awareness we have to deal with. I deleted a bunch of your own rule violating posts in that same thread rather than ban you, as well.

 Manchu wrote:
Peregrine, that is a great example of the lack of self-awareness we have to deal with. I deleted a bunch of your own rule violating posts in that same thread rather than ban you, as well.

Uh, what? All of my posts are still there, not even edited. You deleted posts by someone arguing with the person who insulted me, but they weren't mine.

Nope, check again, I did actually edit several of your posts.You can tell because there is an automatically appended message that says they were edited.

Like so:

 Manchu wrote:
Nope, check again, I did actually edit several of your posts.You can tell because there is an automatically appended message that says they were edited.

Like so:

Uh, no? Everything I posted is still there untouched, except for where you removed quoted text from the deleted posts by the guy who insulted me. The edit notes are because I edited my own posts (typos, etc). You know the dumpster fire pic and such wasn't me, right?

 Alpharius wrote:
Seconded!

For the record, until GW comes out on the record as saying female Space Marines and/or Custodes are a thing, quite frankly, these discussion aren't worth the trouble they inevitably cause.

The thread you locked was not really going off the rails. I was following it closely. As I said, and as you well know, some poster dropped in with usual 'SJW' and I hope this gets locked. Now, as previous thread indeed have gone off topic when attempting to debate such people, I did not, and instead reported said post. And yes, you did delete that offending, post but you also did exactly what the troll desired, IE. locked the thread.

This is completely crazy situation and it is utterly maddening that mods keep enabling such people. You're letting people who are willing to resort to insults to derail topics they don't like dictate what can be discussed here.

So until that time, enjoy talking about female Stormcast, and keep hoping for GW to...do something else different too.

But also keep expecting those other threads to get locked fairly quickly.

Isn't the Custodes situation basically the same as the Stormcast situation was originally? That they seem to be all male but it is not explicitly said they cannot be female. And then people kept talking about it and GW said that there are indeed female Stormcasts and later made some models. But apparently such discussion regarding Custodes is not allowed.

You seem to be assuming that the thread was locked because of a single troll, rather than because of the topic.

The simple fact is that some topics serve very little purpose other than to attract trolls, so we have a choice of waiting until they go stupid and locking them then, or saving everyone the bother and locking them early.

It's not about letting the troll have his way. It's about not leaving the front gate open in troll season.

 insaniak wrote:
You seem to be assuming that the thread was locked because of a single troll, rather than because of the topic.

So basically anything that contains word 'woman' or 'female' is a banned topic. Does this seem reasonable to you?

The simple fact is that some topics serve very little purpose other than to attract trolls, so we have a choice of waiting until they go stupid and locking them then, or saving everyone the bother and locking them early.

Of course it serves purpose! The fact that such threads are created and at least some people manage to discuss the topic civilly proves that people want to discuss these topics. And with Custodes being a new army and their fluff being rather sparse and scattered, such discussion is actually pretty useful (unlike with Space Marines where pretty much everyone knows at this point what the fluff say.)

It's not about letting the troll have his way. It's about not leaving the front gate open in troll season.

If the desire of said trolls is to shut down certain topics (and it is, they openly say so), then it is absolutely them getting their way. But here's a novel thought: how about you ban the trolls and let the people who actually want to discuss these topics do so in peace?


If I for some reason decided that I hated Blood Angels, and every time someone would mention Blood Angels I would swoop in and stat to insult people and stir gak up, would the result be that mods would just lock all Blood Angel threads, or perhaps that I would just get banned? Which option seems more reasonable to you?

 insaniak wrote:
The simple fact is that some topics serve very little purpose other than to attract trolls

On the other hand, the fact that people keep making the threads and keep turning them into long discussions would pretty strongly suggest that they do have a purpose besides trolling, and that the solution is to deal with the trolls directly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Nope, check again, I did actually edit several of your posts.You can tell because there is an automatically appended message that says they were edited.

Like so:

Uh, no? Everything I posted is still there untouched, except for where you removed quoted text from the deleted posts by the guy who insulted me. The edit notes are because I edited my own posts (typos, etc). You know the dumpster fire pic and such wasn't me, right?

Correction: perhaps you did get a bit aggressive in editing and delete a comment about "the only thing fleshing it out is going to do is reveal exactly how people will min-max it and break it", which is not a rule #1 violation by any sane standard, in the process of deleting all the other stuff. And I can say you're wrong with a lot of confidence here, because I specifically ignored this person's attempts to bait me into saying something ban-worthy and only commented on the game design ideas. Literally the only thing I said about the OP as a person was "I didn't look at who posted this, this is entirely about your bad idea" in response to accusing me of harassment and having a vendetta against them.

 Crimson wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
You seem to be assuming that the thread was locked because of a single troll, rather than because of the topic.

So basically anything that contains word 'woman' or 'female' is a banned topic. Does this seem reasonable to you?

The simple fact is that some topics serve very little purpose other than to attract trolls, so we have a choice of waiting until they go stupid and locking them then, or saving everyone the bother and locking them early.

Of course it serves purpose! The fact that such threads are created and at least some people manage to discuss the topic civilly proves that people want to discuss these topics. And with Custodes being a new army and their fluff being rather sparse and scattered, such discussion is actually pretty useful (unlike with Space Marines where pretty much everyone knows at this point what the fluff say.)

It's not about letting the troll have his way. It's about not leaving the front gate open in troll season.

If the desire of said trolls is to shut down certain topics, then it is absolutely them getting their way. But here's a novel thought: how about you ban the trolls and let the people who actually want to discuss these topics do so in peace?


If I for some reason decided that I hated Blood Angels, and every time someone would mention Blood Angels I would swoop in and stat to insult people and stir gak up, would the result be that mods would just lock all Blood Angel threads, or perhaps that I would just get banned? Which option seems more reasonable to you?

So, uh, I don't like defending Mods. But are you trying to prove some point by derailing this thread?

Suggesting the entire group is a bunch of misogynists could be called trolling.

 techsoldaten wrote:

Suggesting the entire group is a bunch of misogynists could be called trolling.

At least in the Custodes thread no one certainly did so or anything even remotely sounding like that. (And it rarely happens otherwise either, it is just that some people interpret 'There is sexism in the gaming community' to mean 'all gamers are sexist'.)

And I guess I do want to give the Mods some credit for protecting the environment that exists on Dakka.

It's very easy to find people online who will agree with you. But the Internet is not good for fostering actual discussions on difficult topics. This is because many channels / communities are designed to promote a specific perspective, and anything that challenges that view becomes an offense to the group. And a group reaction follows, with all the subtlety that goes along with it.

Sometimes, the term Troll gets thrown around too easily. It could mean someone who is deliberately trying to antagonize a group online. Often, it's used against anyone whose perspective differs from that of the dominant group.

It's not fair to ask Mods to sort the former from the later. And mobs don't need defending from people who don't share their perspective, it's the other way around.

Again, I don't like Mods or attempts to cosy up with them. But the Mods on Dakka have done a good job keeping US Politics - aka an endless excuse to fight - off the boards. Asking them to single out people for whatever reason is not going to work well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

Suggesting the entire group is a bunch of misogynists could be called trolling.

At least in the Custodes thread no one certainly did so or anything even remotely sounding like that. (And it rarely happens otherwise either, it is just that some people interpret 'There is sexism in the gaming community' to mean 'all gamers are sexist'.)

That's right, no one in the Custodes thread did.

 Crimson wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
You seem to be assuming that the thread was locked because of a single troll, rather than because of the topic.

So basically anything that contains word 'woman' or 'female' is a banned topic. Does this seem reasonable to you?

This is the quote that I was responding to.

On the one hand, there are threads on Dakka that do mention women and females that have not been locked.

On the other hand, discussions about gender are very polarizing and very few of them have lead to any kind of constructive discussion on Dakka. Of course they are going to be locked.

 techsoldaten wrote:
It's not fair to ask Mods to sort the former from the later.

Of course it is. We do it all the time. If someone says " space marines and every plays them, this thread needs to be locked" the mods delete the post and ban the poster for trolling, they don't shrug and say "we can't take a position on this, space marine discussion is banned". The idea that we can't sort out trolls on particular subjects has way more to do with individual biases and a reluctance to call certain posts/posters (which the mod in question often sympathizes with)* trolls than any actual difficulty in separating the two.

*And no, I am not referring to a specific subject or mod here, just a general trend across multiple people and subjects.

 Peregrine wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
It's not fair to ask Mods to sort the former from the later.

Of course it is. We do it all the time. If someone says " space marines and every plays them, this thread needs to be locked" the mods delete the post and ban the poster for trolling, they don't shrug and say "we can't take a position on this, space marine discussion is banned". The idea that we can't sort out trolls on particular subjects has way more to do with individual biases and a reluctance to call certain posts/posters (which the mod in question often sympathizes with)* trolls than any actual difficulty in separating the two.

*And no, I am not referring to a specific subject or mod here, just a general trend across multiple people and subjects.

In the far flung future, there will be a species of Mod capable of perfect judgement, with the time to read through all conversations and instantly determine the right and proper fate for all who choose to argue. They will become living embodiments of the forums themselves and keep detailed files on every user and every transgression so that we may know their name. And none shall escape their divine judgement.

Until then... strawman arguments like this, where you are assigning work to people already tasked with difficult jobs, will be treated as pleas for better babysitters.

 Peregrine wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
It's not fair to ask Mods to sort the former from the later.

Of course it is. We do it all the time. If someone says " space marines and every plays them, this thread needs to be locked" the mods delete the post and ban the poster for trolling, they don't shrug and say "we can't take a position on this, space marine discussion is banned". The idea that we can't sort out trolls on particular subjects has way more to do with individual biases and a reluctance to call certain posts/posters (which the mod in question often sympathizes with)* trolls than any actual difficulty in separating the two.

*And no, I am not referring to a specific subject or mod here, just a general trend across multiple people and subjects.

Indeed. And these people often even make it super easy by flat out stating that they want to get the thread locked.

The best part of this thread is why it was started and where it has gone!

I've been on a few forums here and there and I can pretty confidently say that this one really does have the most hands off Moderation - especially in terms of letting people who consistently break the rules of the site continue to post here on the site.

After the occasional warning and/or suspension, of course.

But yes, there's always room for improvement!

 techsoldaten wrote:
In the far flung future, there will be a species of Mod capable of perfect judgement, with the time to read through all conversations and instantly determine the right and proper fate for all who choose to argue. They will become living embodiments of the forums themselves and keep detailed files on every user and every transgression so that we may know their name. And none shall escape their divine judgement.

Until then... strawman arguments like this, where you are assigning work to people already tasked with difficult jobs, will be treated as pleas for better babysitters.

Perfect judgement is hardly required. We're talking about a thread where the troll literally came in and said "I'm going to get this thread locked". It's not that hard to see that yes, that person is a troll, and the solution is to remove the troll.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Alpharius wrote:
I've been on a few forums here and there and I can pretty confidently say that this one really does have the most hands off Moderation - especially in terms of letting people who consistently break the rules of the site continue to post here on the site.

On the other hand, I've been on a few forums here and there and this one has some of the strictest moderation, both in terms of banning people because superficial politeness is more important than being right or honest or even a decent person, and in terms of eagerness to lock threads for things like minor tangents. And things would be greatly improved by moving in that hands-off direction.

(And by appointing Peregrine head of moderation policy, but we know nobody is going to be brave enough to take that necessary step.)

 Peregrine wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
In the far flung future, there will be a species of Mod capable of perfect judgement, with the time to read through all conversations and instantly determine the right and proper fate for all who choose to argue. They will become living embodiments of the forums themselves and keep detailed files on every user and every transgression so that we may know their name. And none shall escape their divine judgement.

Until then... strawman arguments like this, where you are assigning work to people already tasked with difficult jobs, will be treated as pleas for better babysitters.

Perfect judgement is hardly required. We're talking about a thread where the troll literally came in and said "I'm going to get this thread locked". It's not that hard to see that yes, that person is a troll, and the solution is to remove the troll.

Perfect judgement and a lot of patience is required in threads like this one, the original topic is being hijacked. You've already called the Mods a bunch of misogynists, now you're saying they're too lax on people who disagree with you.

This may not be the explicit, shut the thread down variety of Trolling mentioned in the earlier post. It's more of the suggestive, low-level angry, let's start an argument but not discuss anything constructive variety.

Be glad they are so patient with you.

 techsoldaten wrote:
You've already called the Mods a bunch of misogynists

Lolwut? No, I haven't. Please pay more attention to who you're replying to if you're going to make accusations of ban-worthy behavior like that.

And no, I am not saying they're too lax on people I disagree with, I'm saying they're too lax on trolling. There are plenty of people who I disagree with that don't post things like "I'm going to get this thread locked" and then do it.

 techsoldaten wrote:
Perfect judgement and a lot of patience is required in threads like this one, the original topic is being hijacked.

The OP of this thread is congratulating the mods for killing discussion he wasn't interested in reading. To say that any discussion that feels differently is hijacking the thread seems... inaccurate, lets say.

 Peregrine wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
You've already called the Mods a bunch of misogynists

Lolwut? No, I haven't. Please pay more attention to who you're replying to if you're going to make accusations of ban-worthy behavior like that.

And no, I am not saying they're too lax on people I disagree with, I'm saying they're too lax on trolling. There are plenty of people who I disagree with that don't post things like "I'm going to get this thread locked" and then do it.

Yeah, that's right, Crimson is the one calling Mods misogynsts.

You're just the one who wants to tell the Mods how to do their jobs, and to have more people banned.

Thank you for making that more clear.

 techsoldaten wrote:
You're just the one who wants to tell the Mods how to do their jobs, and to have more people banned.

I'm not really sure where "ban people who are openly trolling" became a controversial point of view.

I do, however, admit to telling them how to do their jobs, because I'm right. They would be better off listening to me (and even better, making me a mod). If you want to offer your own opinions on how they should do their jobs, feel free. It is, after all, the feedback section of the forum, so such opinions are entirely appropriate.

 Peregrine wrote:
On the other hand, I've been on a few forums here and there and this one has some of the strictest moderation

I agree but generally I've found it excellent. I think this site has some really great moderators in specific, like Reds8n, Alpharius, Motyak, Insaniak, KK, etc. If you go to Facebook groups around the h-h-hobby you'll quickly find lighter moderation isn't always better.

Mostly I'm just really disappointed and dejected not only by some (imo) really high profile bad moderation I saw recently, but a tacit endorsement of the heckler's veto. ITT you have mods saying some threads are problematic, but I think you have problematic posters, not problematic topics. Perhaps I am being naive and not just accepting that this is how the community actually is despite ample evidence that well, it is.

It's not reasonable that some people can see a topic they're not interested in, flat out declare in the thread they're going to get it locked, proceed to crap it up, and then successfully have it locked, over and over again.

 Peregrine wrote:
I do, however, admit to telling them how to do their jobs, because I'm right.

Oh. Thank you for making it clear your opinion is right.

Put 'Mod Boss' on your sig so the rest of us can remember.

 Ouze wrote:
If you go to Facebook groups around the h-h-hobby you'll quickly find lighter moderation isn't always better.

It isn't, and that's part of the problem. Moderation is excessive at certain times, but then nonexistent at others. For example, people complaining about "WAAC TFGs" and other thinly-veiled insults aimed at competitive players have a lot of freedom to make those insults as long as they don't say the word at any point. It's just taken for granted that attacking competitive players is ok, while saying similar things about casual/narrative players gets you banned for being "rude".

Or consider this thread: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/60/263433.page#9838862. Yeah, it was bumped after a long time by an advertising bot, but instead of just deleting the advertising post and leaving the thread to disappear again it was locked, keeping it on the front page for a while, and then an identical thread was posted soon after. What's the point in locking the original thread if you're just going to have another copy of it again? It seems like way too often threads are locked just to have the discussion move to the next thread, often with the locking moderator encouraging a new thread. Just let things continue in the original thread, it's not like there are bonus points for locking lots of stuff.

 Peregrine wrote:
(and even better, making me a mod).

SOON BABY.

 techsoldaten wrote:


Yeah, that's right, Crimson is the one calling Mods misogynsts.

What? When did I do that?