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.

 greatbigtree wrote:
You can let your big-ass personality out. It’s freeing. Think of the rules as strong guidelines. Sometimes it’s ok to put a toe over the line if there’s good reason to do so. So take the slap on the wrist. Get a temp ban if that’s what you need to do... then get back in the game!

I hope you like it here, but if you don’t, try someplace else. Sometimes you need to experience other cultures to appreciate where you’re at.

Sure you can. If you're a 'face'.

The rest of us get banned.

 Excommunicatus wrote:

 greatbigtree wrote:
You can let your big-ass personality out. It’s freeing. Think of the rules as strong guidelines. Sometimes it’s ok to put a toe over the line if there’s good reason to do so. So take the slap on the wrist. Get a temp ban if that’s what you need to do... then get back in the game!

I hope you like it here, but if you don’t, try someplace else. Sometimes you need to experience other cultures to appreciate where you’re at.

Sure you can. If you're a 'face'.

The rest of us get banned.

Quesion 1) Why do you think the mods prefer some people to others? Have you considered the possibility that you just bring less to the boards than some people you perceive as 'faces'?

Question 2) Even if some people have achieved their status as 'faces' by some method other than contributing to the forum, such as knowing them in real-life, why should the unpaid mods of this private forum not be allowed to show favouritism?

 Fifty wrote:

 Excommunicatus wrote:
How come the spam rules don't apply to the 25,527 times Peregrine has posted the exact same value-less whinging?

10 threads per year and 10 posts per day hardly constitutes spamming. 10 posts is a lot, by my standards, but hardly denying other people the opportunity to speak.

How come they don't apply to Pancakey? Delvarius Centurion?

Pancakey's "is it dead?" threads are spread out over months. Delvarus Centurion is frustrating, in my opinion, but has not monopolised a section of the forum to the same extent. It would not surprise me if mods had spoken to him anyway.

How come Queen Anne's Revenge can go around freely questioning the mental health of other posters? Why can Peregrine flatly state that another poster is a liar?

First, please quote so people can judge for themselves, and secondly, how do you know nothing has been done about it behind the scenes?

Im confident hes talking about queen saying that my posts about the way knives are designed was that of a crazy man lol, but i didn't take offense i understand it could be seen as unusual topic, and i don't think hes serious since he doesn't know me. ( and if he is serious its just his opinion i dont care. )

I am at a loss as to how to explain that rules being applied inconsistently and capriciously is a problem.

It seems you're already determined to miss the point.

And yeah, I was referring to Stormtatious' thread. The post is still there. It was reported. I'm fairly comfortable resting on the assumption that a post that doesn't get deleted attracts no further action.

Well, your assumption is incorrect.

Unsurprisingly.

 Excommunicatus wrote:
I am at a loss as to how to explain that rules being applied inconsistently and capriciously is a problem.

If it was the government or legal system applying them inconsistently, it would be a huge problem.

If it was a company applying them inconsistently it would be something of a problem. (And a bigger one if it were due to, say, racism.)

If it were someone applying rules inconsistently to visitors to their home, that is not really a problem. Just accept it, or leave.

And DakkaDakka is closer to being someone's home than a government or company. You have no righst here. You have no entitlement to be here. If you don't like it, just leave.

Seriously, if a friend brought you to a party at my house and I gave them free booze and snacks, but none to you, it might not be very friendly, but if you did not like it your only recourse would be to leave.

If you don't like DakkaDakka, leave. If enough people agree with you and also leave, DakkaDakka will fail, and that will be their problem, but it is their decision.

Ultimately none of the owners or mods appointed by the owner owe you a thing. Deal with it.

 Excommunicatus wrote:
And yeah, I was referring to Stormtatious' thread. The post is still there. It was reported. I'm fairly comfortable resting on the assumption that a post that doesn't get deleted attracts no further action.

Excommunicatus, I know there's a lot we're not going to convince you of / completely see eye to eye on here, but this assumption is really not the case. Most posts that are moderated are not deleted, and many aren't even edited.

If the opposite were true (that every impolite or spammy post was just deleted) I think the forum would be much worse for it.

It can be frustrating dealing with moderation that you can't see all of behind the scenes, but it's an important principle for yakface (the owner of Dakka) that moderation mostly remains private for each user.

Hashing out / asking about / discussing broader site issues, including moderation, is part of why we have this Nuts & Bolts section of the site, though - so that we can at least talk about it and answer questions generally.

Again, I know this won't completely satisfy your concerns, but I wanted to address at least that one part (the assumption that if a post isn't deleted in response to a user alert, no action was taken, which just isn't true or even the norm).

Fair enough, you also have arbitrary and capricious rules about which posts get deleted, then,

Mea culpa.

No, the rule is that it is up to the judgement of the mod who responds. Simple and easy

 Fifty wrote:

 Excommunicatus wrote:
I am at a loss as to how to explain that rules being applied inconsistently and capriciously is a problem.

If it was the government or legal system applying them inconsistently, it would be a huge problem.

If it was a company applying them inconsistently it would be something of a problem. (And a bigger one if it were due to, say, racism.)

If it were someone applying rules inconsistently to visitors to their home, that is not really a problem. Just accept it, or leave.

And DakkaDakka is closer to being someone's home than a government or company. You have no righst here. You have no entitlement to be here. If you don't like it, just leave.

Seriously, if a friend brought you to a party at my house and I gave them free booze and snacks, but none to you, it might not be very friendly, but if you did not like it your only recourse would be to leave.

If you don't like DakkaDakka, leave. If enough people agree with you and also leave, DakkaDakka will fail, and that will be their problem, but it is their decision.

Ultimately none of the owners or mods appointed by the owner owe you a thing. Deal with it.

If they just came out with it and said 'gak yeah, we're biased as hell', as Manchu implicitly did, this thread wouldn't have been made and Dreadwinter's other thread would be two posts long.

It is the pretense of consistency and "one set of rules for all" that irks me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
No, the rule is that it is up to the judgement of the mod who responds. Simple and easy

Which is no more than a rationalization of arbitrary and capriciously applied rules.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
No, the rule is that it is up to the judgement of the mod who responds. Simple and easy

Some People will confuse this with some sort of brutal dictatorship i feel forgetting its a website for specific people, not a country.

Dude, I like this site so I give it money and am defending it. Why are you even still here though?

I dislike some things. I used to find Frazzled annoying when he was a mod, for example, but I weighed up the pros and cons and stayed and accepted that I had to accept what was not mine tk change.

Why are you even here if you have such huge issues with it? Find somewhere that suits you better, or create something yourself. Not so easy? Tough! Learn that the creator of something as awesome as Dakka has earned the right to have it as they want it, and not pander to you.

Suffice it to say that in any forum members have to have a degree of trust in the moderators of that site because they are volunteers who mostly just move threads around and delete spam.

They aren't consulting a 10000 page rule book that outlines the detailed fine points of social rules and codes of conduct; they don't spend 5 years studying and training to become a mod etc...

If people have no faith in even the most basic level of moderation then chances are they are just going to keep butting heads with the staff of any site entirely

Some People will confuse this with some sort of brutal dictatorship i feel forgetting its a website for specific people, not a country.

I can't tell if you finally get it, or if you are drifting even further from understanding the issue.

It can't be a dictatorship because it is a free to access, non-compulsory website, not a country.

It is, indeed, a website for whomsoever the owner sees fit.

 Fifty wrote:

Some People will confuse this with some sort of brutal dictatorship i feel forgetting its a website for specific people, not a country.

I can't tell if you finally get it, or if you are drifting even further from understanding the issue.

It can't be a dictatorship because it is a free to access, non-compulsory website, not a country.

It is, indeed, a website for whomsoever the owner sees fit.

No no, im saying some people will confuse it for that, not me, i have no issues, you misunderstood me.

I'm not really sure why you're interpreting it as being "a huge problem" on my part, except that it's an obvious and convenient strawman.

Overall, I like and enjoy Dakka. It isn't perfect however, and I don't see any reason why issues with the site can't be raised.

A mod just said that we have this section specifically to raise such issues.

Its not a huge problem, but he was spamming the issues been addressed as such and i don't see any reason to continue this.

 Stormatious wrote:

 Fifty wrote:

Some People will confuse this with some sort of brutal dictatorship i feel forgetting its a website for specific people, not a country.

I can't tell if you finally get it, or if you are drifting even further from understanding the issue.

It can't be a dictatorship because it is a free to access, non-compulsory website, not a country.

It is, indeed, a website for whomsoever the owner sees fit.

No no, im saying some people will confuse it for that, not me, i have no issues, you misunderstood me.

Sorry, I think I briefly mixed you up with Excommunicatus due to the slight similarity of your Avatars.

Ahahaha, i thought that might happen here... god now alot of people probably are consfused.

A) Can people stop being disingenuous and comparing this to Yak's home, you don't invite the public into your home at all hours of the night and day. Comments like this are designed to do nothing but shut down discussion.

B)

 Excommunicatus wrote:
I'm not really sure why you're interpreting it as being "a huge problem" on my part, except that it's an obvious and convenient strawman.

Overall, I like and enjoy Dakka. It isn't perfect however, and I don't see any reason why issues with the site can't be raised.

A mod just said that we have this section specifically to raise such issues.

This,

C) How is it ok for the people who originally complained about the multiple threads being started by the same guy to give their opinion on the running of the site but not for people who think there was noting wrong with those threads ? Unsurprisingly not a lot of mods have made such call it just seems to be others trying to make it for them.

I didn't complain about the original threads.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Excommunicatus wrote:
I'm not really sure why you're interpreting it as being "a huge problem" on my part, except that it's an obvious and convenient strawman.

Overall, I like and enjoy Dakka. It isn't perfect however, and I don't see any reason why issues with the site can't be raised.

A mod just said that we have this section specifically to raise such issues.

The reason I am responding is because you seem to have a sense of entitlement. Very possibly it is just the nature of the internet making it difficult infer tone. I think it is fine to query things, but a lot of what you have written seems to veer into criticism, and not of the positive kind.

Yeah, it's "entitled" to expect evenhanded moderation. That definitely isn't just another illegitimate attempt to dismiss the point being made.

I don't expect special treatment and it isn't possible to logically infer that I do from what has been said.

I expect rules to be applied in a consistent manner, regardless of who they're being applied to.

What specifically is the issue?

Rules being applied inconsistently and capriciously.

Given that the mods are human, yes it is exceedingly entitled to expect inhuman perfection in moderation, especially when each poster has a different history, etc.

That’s not specific. I mean, it what instance.

 Manchu wrote:
That’s not specific. I mean, it what instance.

Have a goosey at the Veganuary thread.

You still haven't paid me the $10 you owe me from that.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/770311.page#10319104

I like how i got snipped there, for explaining that the double headed eagle is a symbol of the HRE and tried to formulate that the IOM is modeled after a HRE in space but was the only one that got the cut.

Meanwhile the others could even discuss politics, in essence.
(and here i thought politics got banned.........)

I belive enough is said about rules enforcement/ application.

 Excommunicatus wrote:
Yeah, it's "entitled" to expect evenhanded moderation. That definitely isn't just another illegitimate attempt to dismiss the point being made.

I don't expect special treatment and it isn't possible to logically infer that I do from what has been said.

I expect rules to be applied in a consistent manner, regardless of who they're being applied to.

Again, why are you entitled to be treated even-handedly at this privately-owned, non-essential hobby website?

For that matter, what have you done to deserve any access to Dakka? I mean, you are getting it for free. Sure, question things, but don't set out your expectations.

The mods are even here engaging with you, because they are decent individuals, even though there is absolutely no reason that they should have to. They receive no payment, they get grief and hassle, seriously, how do they answer to you?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mind you, I am now reading through the Veganuary thread, and you faced a lot of ignorance and hostility in that thread before you finally snapped and resorted to rudeness yourself. Although you were more overtly rude, I can see why you'd want to be and sympathise.

edit: Although, again intentionally or not, you come across as very condescending in that thread. I agree with most of what you say there, but you don't come across well.

 Excommunicatus wrote:
How come the spam rules don't apply to the 25,527 times Peregrine has posted the exact same value-less whinging?

How come they don't apply to Pancakey? Delvarius Centurion?

How come Queen Anne's Revenge can go around freely questioning the mental health of other posters?

Why can Peregrine flatly state that another poster is a liar?

Wow.. This has made my day. Wasn't having my thread locked a few weeks ago enough? now you're trying to snitch me up for a post you're deliberately trying to manipulate the context of? Laughable