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.

nfe wrote:
Could this be resolved by having a standalone thread posted by an established user discussing what people think are appropriate or inappropriate depictions in miniatures? Is there a subforum you think best fits that?

I think the Ukrainian slave girl model deserves being flagged to people, but I'd also be really interested in that discussion around a lot of inspired-by models and historicals lines.

In theory, this would absolutely be an appropriate topic for Dakka Discussions.

In practice, I fear it would quickly devolve into posters insulting each other for their differing opinions on this particular subject, but it would be worth a shot. It would certainly be useful to have broader opinions from the community on this.



Edit - I will also mention that previous discussions on this sort of thing were a while back now, and attitudes within the gaming community towards women and minorities have been slowly evolving (for the better, IMO) over that time. As such, and seeing the feedback here so far, it's something that I'll be looking to discuss with the mod team and the site's owners to try to establish an appropriate policy moving forwards.

How many of us in this thread wouldn’t have even known this was a thing if not for this topic?
Good job stirring the pot.
Where do i get my pitchfork?

Lets be real, this thread (and the deleted thread in question) is a branch-off of a Ukraine War thread from an offshoot forum of this site. I knew that just by looking at who is posting in it and after a few minutes of reading, confirmed it.

The initial message was(imo) childishly written and condescending. Most damningly, written by an obvious smurf account. If you’ve been on this forum for a decent amount of time, you’ve definitely seen them. Whether it be posting hot takes, false rumors or just plain toxicity. That post looked like Grade-A, pure and unadulterated poop and swoop. You might disagree, but thats how I saw it, and apparently the Mods.

Worst part of that now deleted post = I agreed with it. I feel strongly that it was the wrong tone(see above) and the wrong messenger(also, see above).

It would have been pretty dope if a DakkaDakka poster with extensive history on this site had posted the message. Say if BobtheInquisitor, Mad Doc Grotsnik, Almightywalrus or Disciple of Fate(I see you!) or any other poster in this thread of equal Dakka “renown” had written a similiar, more mature message, signed off by other members of that offshoot forum and implored other community members to sign off, I’d have been with you. I don’t know how any of the posters I just listed feel about me(and won’t lose sleep over how they feel about me )but I generally respect their opinions. Would have been cool to see an attempt at consensus.

Instead of that we got a smurf account who at first glance, looked textbook trollish. We got dudes calling Dakka pro-mysoginistic, creepy and unwelcoming, along with a poster who seemingly hasn’t posted in over a year arguing about moderation. None of that seems conducive to healthy dialogue.

I challenge you folks to craft a message about how that content is not something we want in this community (I specifically hate how its the smut stuff mixed in with pop culture/cartoon stuff, personally). In light of current events and growing diversity in our hobby, it is indeed harmful to the community in my opinion. If its a message that resounds with the majority, we can get that content out perhaps. Others might disagree though and we’d have to either migrate or just tolerate the filth as we have been.

I get paid this friday, I was planning on resubscribing to DCM because I like this forum and wish to support it. I’ll also buy whomever is the author of this message a DCM subscription, if they want it.

If my post feels like an attack, its not intended. Its definitely a written “thrown gauntlet” though. If you feel attacked, feel free to talk smack about me and this post on the other forum in as colorful a language as you want. Apparently one of you thinks you could make a sailor blush, but I was in the Army and now work in the motorcycle industry, you won’t offend me. And I won’t partake. I’m strictly an observer

For what it's worth, the post wasn't caused by the off-shoot forum, but was being discussed after it happened because it was topical to one of the discussion topics that was already ongoing.

I respectfully disagree :

If I still had a Dakka account I would go and post a link to the 2012 thread into the current promotional thread, with a short summary of it. I may create a new account to do this and get banned immediately…

Regardless, said my part! Good night.

 insaniak wrote:

nfe wrote:
Could this be resolved by having a standalone thread posted by an established user discussing what people think are appropriate or inappropriate depictions in miniatures? Is there a subforum you think best fits that?

I think the Ukrainian slave girl model deserves being flagged to people, but I'd also be really interested in that discussion around a lot of inspired-by models and historicals lines.

In theory, this would absolutely be an appropriate topic for Dakka Discussions.

In practice, I fear it would quickly devolve into posters insulting each other for their differing opinions on this particular subject, but it would be worth a shot. It would certainly be useful to have broader opinions from the community on this.



Edit - I will also mention that previous discussions on this sort of thing were a while back now, and attitudes within the gaming community towards women and minorities have been slowly evolving (for the better, IMO) over that time. As such, and seeing the feedback here so far, it's something that I'll be looking to discuss with the mod team and the site's owners to try to establish an appropriate policy moving forwards.

Like whether somebody portraying a prominent Ukrainian politician as a naked, humiliated "slave girl" ought to be the sort of thing you should let slide. As you have in the past before we got to where we are today.

You shouldn't be moderating a damn thing, Insaniak, with all the time you have to spend handwringing over what *really* matters while civilians die in Brother Vinni's designated (and permissible) kicking space.

 insaniak wrote:

In practice, I fear it would quickly devolve into posters insulting each other for their differing opinions on this particular subject, but it would be worth a shot. It would certainly be useful to have broader opinions from the community on this.

So, I'm gonna throw out an absolutely insane idea.

Dakka could... you know... moderate a thread for once. Dakka could enforce some civility instead of letting certain users turn it into a gak show per their usual methods.

Also, I want to point out a few very important parts of Rule 1 and further down the page, I have no idea if they were brought up before:

It also should go without saying that swearing, profanity, sexual references, etc, are strictly forbidden, including all images that are posted on or uploaded to our site. Remember that we have users of all ages and that Dakka should be a welcoming place for everyone to enjoy.

Graphic or otherwise inappropriate images (and even links to such images) will be removed on sight

Any inappropriate images (sexual, highly graphic, etc) uploaded to the gallery will be deleted.

Pretty sure "Ukrainian slavegirl" violates these, even if we ignore the implied rape fantasy. Now, unless it's only sexual acts, in which case people should be in the clear to start uploading porn, so long as no deed is being done, yeah? And in the unlikely case that's true, I think the explicit "Ukrainian" part of the "Ukrainian slavegirl" might be unwelcoming to Ukrainians and women in general.

If the rules aren't being enforced, why do they even exist? The rules seem to only be enforced at a moderator's whim.

Because they either don't give a gak for the site's rules, or would rather give space to this rubbish, simple as.

 Wolfblade wrote:

So, I'm gonna throw out an absolutely insane idea.

Dakka could... you know... moderate a thread for once. Dakka could enforce some civility instead of letting certain users turn it into a gak show per their usual methods.

Dakka can, and frequently does. In many cases, however, threads spiral out of control while the mods aren't online, and by the time we get to them they're beyond saving. That's not ideal, but the mods are volunteers with other calls on their time, and we simply can't be permanently online.

Also, I want to point out a few very important parts of Rule 1 and further down the page, I have no idea if they were brought up before:

It also should go without saying that swearing, profanity, sexual references, etc, are strictly forbidden, including all images that are posted on or uploaded to our site. Remember that we have users of all ages and that Dakka should be a welcoming place for everyone to enjoy.

Graphic or otherwise inappropriate images (and even links to such images) will be removed on sight

Any inappropriate images (sexual, highly graphic, etc) uploaded to the gallery will be deleted.

Pretty sure "Ukrainian slavegirl" violates these, even if we ignore the implied rape fantasy. Now, unless it's only sexual acts, in which case people should be in the clear to start uploading porn, so long as no deed is being done, yeah? And in the unlikely case that's true, I think the explicit "Ukrainian" part of the "Ukrainian slavegirl" might be unwelcoming to Ukrainians and women in general.

And, as I said, that's something that will be discussed. Nudity has historically been allowed with appropriate NSFW tags. The issue here is down to where the line is drawn between 'acceptable' nudity and graphic sexual references. And that line will be different for different people.

Catulle wrote:
Because they either don't give a gak for the site's rules, or would rather give space to this rubbish, simple as.

That's not particularly helpful. I've already pointed out that I find the slavegirl miniature, and others like it, distasteful. There are any number of miniatures that I would rather be discussing right now. And if I 'didn't give a gak' about the site, I wouldn't have become a mod in the first place.

I understand that you feel strongly about this issue, and I'd like to work towards a better site for everyone... but the hyperbole and the insults just get in the way of actual constructive discussion.

 Wolfblade wrote:


Again, the issue isn't nudity, but the rape slave fantasy associated with said nudity.
.

This is it exactly. And I'll add that the fact that it relates to a currently ongoing conflict, where this is happening to people right at this moment, and directly and purposefully meant to represent those people, that makes it absolutely unacceptable.

Vinni's thread either needs to carry some sort of warning, or my preference and I think the right thing to do would be he is banned and the thread removed.

Otherwise you are tacitly saying, this sort of thing, this representation of the rape of Ukranian women in war, this is acceptable, this is what we are happy with Dakka being and people coming here and peddling that sort of thing.

 nels1031 wrote:

The initial message was(imo) childishly written and condescending. Most damningly, written by an obvious smurf account. If you’ve been on this forum for a decent amount of time, you’ve definitely seen them. Whether it be posting hot takes, false rumors or just plain toxicity. That post looked like Grade-A, pure and unadulterated poop and swoop. You might disagree, but thats how I saw it, and apparently the Mods.

It could also have been a long term poster who knew that they'd face backlash for mentioning it, as per the quote mentioned.

along with a poster who seemingly hasn’t posted in over a year arguing about moderation. None of that seems conducive to healthy dialogue.

That'd be me?

I largely gave up on Dakka when politics was banned because nothing was being done about the trolling and abuse, though I pop in from time to time to browse. I've only fairly recently got back into gaming so spending more time here but it seems the bad reputation hasn't gone away so I'm not sure how long I'll hang about for.

 insaniak wrote:

nfe wrote:
Could this be resolved by having a standalone thread posted by an established user discussing what people think are appropriate or inappropriate depictions in miniatures? Is there a subforum you think best fits that?

I think the Ukrainian slave girl model deserves being flagged to people, but I'd also be really interested in that discussion around a lot of inspired-by models and historicals lines.

In theory, this would absolutely be an appropriate topic for Dakka Discussions.

In practice, I fear it would quickly devolve into posters insulting each other for their differing opinions on this particular subject, but it would be worth a shot. It would certainly be useful to have broader opinions from the community on this.

Edit - I will also mention that previous discussions on this sort of thing were a while back now, and attitudes within the gaming community towards women and minorities have been slowly evolving (for the better, IMO) over that time. As such, and seeing the feedback here so far, it's something that I'll be looking to discuss with the mod team and the site's owners to try to establish an appropriate policy moving forwards.

Ok. I've actually a interest in how welcoming/exclusionary passtimes connected to the past are so it might even be a handy way of getting some general steers on stuff to pursue, aside from it being worthwhile in and of itself. I'll have a think over the holidays about how to frame it.

 nels1031 wrote:
It would have been pretty dope if a DakkaDakka poster with extensive history on this site had posted the message. Say if BobtheInquisitor, Mad Doc Grotsnik, Almightywalrus or Disciple of Fate(I see you!) or any other poster in this thread of equal Dakka “renown” had written a similiar, more mature message, signed off by other members of that offshoot forum and implored other community members to sign off, I’d have been with you. I don’t know how any of the posters I just listed feel about me(and won’t lose sleep over how they feel about me )but I generally respect their opinions. Would have been cool to see an attempt at consensus.

I have been summoned. I'd just like to point out that I haven't posted for nearly two years and even then I was more or less only back to post in the ETC setup thread. If a poster not having posted for a year is suspicious, I'd be doubly so and I don't think I'd have posted here if you didn't ask for it. I haven't kept up with 40k since GW decided I needed to rebuild my whole army from scratch to have a chance at winning, so I'm coming at this with a somewhat outdated view of the Dakka community, an axe to grind, and a recently greatly reduced respect for one mod in particular. Please bear that caveat about potential bias in mind.

In my mind there's three points I'd like to touch upon:

My stance on the mini in question is that it doesn't take much effort to go "this was already a very borderline case back in the day; given the fact that Russia is currently in the process of making atrocities like what the mini in question represents reality in Ukraine we have chosen to remove it from Dakka". If I tried selling a brand of SS-themed miniatures and advertised them as "Sonderkommando rape-squad" or the like it'd get immediately Exterminatus'd from low orbit, I don't see how this is any less clear-cut. I understand that it's not reasonable to expect mods to remember every old contentious subject, but once it's been brought to attention again it really shouldn't be all that controversial to go "hm, fair point" rather than accusing the post of being made in bad faith to stir up drama.

This segues nicely into the next point, bad faith. Considering the back-and-forths we've had on the subject over the years and the, in my opinion, reluctance the mods have had in acting on low-effort bad faith posts it's not a good look when a post gets removed for "stirring up drama" when there's evidently some support for the removal of the thread the post highlighted from the Dakka community, including (seemingly, correct me if I'm wrong) at least one mod being willing to consider it.

Thirdly, my immediate reaction was also that Mars is an alt account of someone, but the timing is off for it being someone from the other forum. We'd discussed the mini and Dakkas stance on it and then moved on; this popped up a few weeks later. It would have made more sense for the discussion and the events on Dakka to occur in close proximity to each other rather than strung out like this. Regardless of whether Mars is someone's alt or not, I don't think it's unreasonable for the mods to be sceptical of a fresh account going after an old thread, but in the end there's clearly a bunch of people in the Dakka community that are uncomfortable at best with the continued presence of what is essentially Russian nationalist fetish material on the site. What I am questioning is the judgment of the mods that thought the mini was fine in the first place. World context makes the very existence of the miniature drama; it's designed to deliver a message. As pointed out by Wolfblade above the rules aren't ambiguous on this. It shouldn't have to have taken Russia invading Ukraine for the moderation team as a collective to put down the foot of Mork (or possibly Gork) on this.

If it comes down to a matter of opinion I am not okay with that mini.

The mini in question is also, somewhat, meant to be a representation of a specific real life person.

Would the mods allow for nude miniatures of a real person, not a character from media or even a specific TV/movie portrayal of a character but an actual person, made without that persons consent to be advertised on dakka, or allow a user to link to the store of the person responsible for those miniatures?

One can make miniatures of a person without their consent, just as you can make a portrait of a person without their consent. That's fair use across dozens of legal systems.

But a miniature of a person that can be seen to condone or celebrate rape culture, aimed at a particular person or nationality, an image that is explicitly demeaning like revenge or deepfake porn, is very different.

We are also seeing a new paradigm where being the publisher of a work, and claiming you don't have responsibility for it, is unacceptable.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
One can make miniatures of a person without their consent, just as you can make a portrait of a person without their consent. That's fair use across dozens of legal systems.

Maybe legally, but morally? Especially when the miniatures in question are sexual in nature. We all know there's a difference between someone making a model of an actor in their red carpet dress and making a model of them nude in a doggy style position, even if both might fall under "fair use".

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
One can make miniatures of a person without their consent, just as you can make a portrait of a person without their consent. That's fair use across dozens of legal systems.

Maybe legally, but morally? Especially when the miniatures in question are sexual in nature. We all know there's a difference between someone making a model of an actor in their red carpet dress and making a model of them nude in a doggy style position, even if both might fall under "fair use".

When the imagery is non consensual, obviously meant to be sexually demeaning, as I tried to outline above then, it's not just morally problematic, it's quite possibly legally problematic, too, and dakkadakka is the publisher.

The law is moving in this area across the states, Europe and the UK.

I see my name was mentioned.

I haven’t made a “just so you know” post since WGA started working with Dreamforge, and that had all the impact of old man shouting at cloud. The most recent post of that type I’ve seen was in the GSW thread, where a poster reminded everyone they used a Nazi symbol for a texture roller that had nothing to do with the historical context. And that was met with a lot of scoffs.

I just don’t have the energy to post things that will be found counterproductive.

I also haven’t looked in a Brother Vinni thread in years and years.

If I were to post something, it would be along the lines of “For those of you following the Ukraine War and boycotting Russia, be aware that Brother Vinni sells a miniature depicting a former leader of Ukraine as the victim of a sexual war crime.” Something like that.

For what its worth I am all in favour of removing that mini from here and any like it, including some more of Vinni's offerings. Whilst the political climate was very different when the mini was made (a decade ago, before I was even on the site) i still think it is beyond crass and repugnant.

I am not in favour of a blanket ban or yet targeted ban on companies/individuals due to their products (bar the likes of Mandaulbaum who is an outright con man or others of similar ilk) though. If we decide that dakka doesn't want to play host to that kind of thing period, does that mean we get rid of all nude models? All fetishist models (what of Kingdom |Death)? What about 'Male Gaze' style of mini (personally I find alot of CB's female models quite distasteful for needlessly having their arses stuck out)? What of GW making their then current PM into a blood thirsty monster? Or Hasselfree's political sculpts?

It is certainly a discussion that needs to happen seemingly and I would value people's input as to where they see the line but for a large part it is not a cut and dried answer.

To touch on this as well;
"Thirdly, my immediate reaction was also that Mars is an alt account of someone, but the timing is off for it being someone from the other forum. We'd discussed the mini and Dakkas stance on it and then moved on; this popped up a few weeks later. It would have made more sense for the discussion and the events on Dakka to occur in close proximity to each other rather than strung out like this. Regardless of whether Mars is someone's alt or not, I don't think it's unreasonable for the mods to be sceptical of a fresh account going after an old thread..."

The poster is an alt account of a previously banned poster, they post from the same region, using a country specific VPN, using the same language, syntax and grammar, right down to the same spelling mistakes, line breaks and carriage returns. We do not allow people to multi account here and if a previously banned user wants to ask permission to return then they can do so through the proper channels (ie. send an email to webmaster@dakkadakka.com).

All the same, regarding whether or not it's an alt account, how many posts is someone suppose to have before they're allowed to call out stuff? A hundred? A thousand?

Surely what matters is what's being called out, not who called it? Or, at the very least, the mods could, yanno, moderate openly.

I've seen it said that the mods who sanction users who break the rules, but if we aren't seeing it, and the repercussions for their behaviour aren't being shown, I'd argue that it isn't enough. We ought to see the effects and consequences of breaking the rules, or of ad hominem behaviours, or of inflammatory behaviour. Otherwise, how do we know the rules are being actually enforced, because it sure don't feel like it.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
All the same, regarding whether or not it's an alt account, how many posts is someone suppose to have before they're allowed to call out stuff? A hundred? A thousand?

Surely what matters is what's being called out, not who called it? Or, at the very least, the mods could, yanno, moderate openly.

I've seen it said that the mods who sanction users who break the rules, but if we aren't seeing it, and the repercussions for their behaviour aren't being shown, I'd argue that it isn't enough. We ought to see the effects and consequences of breaking the rules, or of ad hominem behaviours, or of inflammatory behaviour. Otherwise, how do we know the rules are being actually enforced, because it sure don't feel like it.

That's because dakka mod action is always taking the easiest path forward, as insaniak so kindly stated in different terms. "What creates the least amount of problems," or something similar. This means not reprimanding users who are endlessly inflammatory or toxic, drag topics off-topic tog et them shut down, and so on. It's easier to delete and ban the post calling vinni out than it is to deal with vinni. It's easier to ban Female Space Marines than it is to deal with the people throwing fits over it "not being canon." It's easier to ban politics than for them to actually moderate it. And I'd agree with this, except it then gets taken to stupid levels. Someone makes a thread posting support for everyone in Ukraine who was affected by the war? donkey-caves come in and make it "political" causing it to be shut down. Sexual images/nudity posted on the website? Easier to pretend it doesn't violate the rules than to make distinctions between them. Eldar rape diorama? Easier to ignore it than face backlash from neckbeards who love it.

And I mean, frankly, if so many mods seem to be against vinni's models, why has nothing been done? All of this just seems like a public performance in an attempt to placate people so they can continue to take the easy path forward. It's no wonder dakka has gotten the bad rep it does really.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
All the same, regarding whether or not it's an alt account, how many posts is someone suppose to have before they're allowed to call out stuff? A hundred? A thousand?.

It's not just about post count. The post that was removed was not written in a way that made it seem like it was an honest attempt to communicate useful information. The way it was written read like a deliberate attempt to stir up drama. And the fact that it was written by a suspended user using an alt account means it likely would have been removed and the account banned regardless.

An honest attempt to say 'Hey, Vinni made this mini a decade ago, is the community ok with that?' from an existing user would have been fine regardless of post count.

 Wolfblade wrote:

And I mean, frankly, if so many mods seem to be against vinni's models, why has nothing been done?.

The mod team a decade ago was largely made up of different people to the team right now. And nothing's been done in the interim simply because the model wasn't on anyone's radar until it was dredged up just now.

As such, as I said, we're open to discussing a change to the existing policy regarding these sorts of models. That will likely go much more smoothly if you stop treating us like we're being deliberately offensive.

 insaniak wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
All the same, regarding whether or not it's an alt account, how many posts is someone suppose to have before they're allowed to call out stuff? A hundred? A thousand?.

It's not just about post count. The post that was removed was not written in a way that made it seem like it was an honest attempt to communicate useful information. The way it was written read like a deliberate attempt to stir up drama. And the fact that it was written by a suspended user using an alt account means it likely would have been removed and the account banned regardless.

An honest attempt to say 'Hey, Vinni made this mini a decade ago, is the community ok with that?' from an existing user would have been fine regardless of post count.

I do notice the rest of my post wasn't addressed.

Also, not "just" about post count? So the post count does matter?
Plus, as mentioned, is that mini itself not "stirring up drama"? Since when was calling out inflammatory content the issue? I understand that there's polite way to call attention to infractions and problematic content, but the solution isn't to ignore the problematic stuff just because it wasn't done properly. What surely should be done is that the improper poster AND the problematic content should be removed, not just the poster.

Take a break from bashing the MODS. There are far too few of them to keep up with everything and it’s an unpaid job. At least it was when I was asked years ago.

Dakkadakka, just like every other forum I have ever been on will always have people of differing opinions, it’s what makes a community a community. Alternate opinions and everyone being able to express themselves is important.

That being said, there are some thoughts and expressions that cannot be tolerated by a group or culture. While a model may have been acceptable in the past, current events can trigger strong emotions today or in the future. The MODs previously decided that some leeway was allowed in the thread, it seems that perhaps it’s time to revisit that decision. Snap decisions are not always the best, so let them revisit the topic and decide if it is time to remove or keep the thread active. Being it’s a holiday season and I’m sure they have other life events going on, it probably won’t be before the end of the year.

Also, not "just" about post count? So the post count does matter?

Of course it does, an account posting inflammatory content on single figure posts is going to attract an awful lot closer examination of motive than say your or I would.

Where it doesn't matter is if an honest point is sincerely raised, which, while I didn't see it, it appears this wasn't.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I do notice the rest of my post wasn't addressed.

I'm not really sure what you expect. We largely keep moderation private for a bunch of reasons, and that's unlikely to change.

Also, not "just" about post count? So the post count does matter?

Any brand new account that seemingly signed up just to comment in a manufacturer's news thread with a link to a different thread from a decade previous is likely to be met with some suspicion as to their actual motives, yes.

Plus, as mentioned, is that mini itself not "stirring up drama"? Since when was calling out inflammatory content the issue? I understand that there's polite way to call attention to infractions and problematic content, but the solution isn't to ignore the problematic stuff just because it wasn't done properly. What surely should be done is that the improper poster AND the problematic content should be removed, not just the poster.

We're not ignoring the problematic stuff. If we were, this thread would have been locked or deleted after the first couple of posts.

For what it's worth, I have deleted the Ukranian slavegirl thread, and the mods are discussing how to deal with the rest of Vinni's output and other similar ranges.

Theophony wrote:Take a break from bashing the MODS. There are far too few of them to keep up with everything and it’s an unpaid job. At least it was when I was asked years ago.

Dakkadakka, just like every other forum I have ever been on will always have people of differing opinions, it’s what makes a community a community. Alternate opinions and everyone being able to express themselves is important.

Yes, and that's why Rule 1 exists, so that everyone CAN express themselves without devolving into misgendering, name-calling, misogynist behaviour, flame-baiting, and so on.

Oh, wait - those happen anyway, and the mods aren't seen to do enough. I'm sorry, but if the mods aren't able to manage their own site, then they need new mods, or they need to take a harder stance on those rules. Or, just get rid of Rule 1.

Considering that the mods can track IP addresses well enough to the point they could ascertain that the user aforementioned was a previously banned poster, and that most infractions come from repeat offenders getting away with the same material, I think that they could easily take a harder stance.

Remember, a community CAN come from difference in opinion (plenty of communities are just fine with shared opinions, and oftentimes are more stable for it), but not all opinions should be heard - especially if those opinions break the community, and the rules set in place for that community.

Sorry, but if you're telling me the mods are overworked, then they need more moderators, or they need to review their own abilities to enforce their own rules. If they can't enforce their own rules, then what point are mods?

Azreal13 wrote:

Also, not "just" about post count? So the post count does matter?

Of course it does, an account posting inflammatory content on single figure posts is going to attract an awful lot closer examination of motive than say your or I would.

Where it doesn't matter is if an honest point is sincerely raised, which, while I didn't see it, it appears this wasn't.

But, when the "inflammatory content" is highlight awareness of other breaches of inflammatory content, isn't the solution to remove both, and not just one?

I don't care, I was answering your point about post count.

 insaniak wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I do notice the rest of my post wasn't addressed.

I'm not really sure what you expect. We largely keep moderation private for a bunch of reasons, and that's unlikely to change.

So what sort of solution/resolution is in place then for the issues raised with not seeing adequate results for user reprimanding? Or is this not going to be addressed?

Also, not "just" about post count? So the post count does matter?

Any brand new account that seemingly signed up just to comment in a manufacturer's news thread with a link to a different thread from a decade previous is likely to be met with some suspicion as to their actual motives, yes.

Even if they actually highlight a relevant issue?

We're not ignoring the problematic stuff. If we were, this thread would have been locked or deleted after the first couple of posts.

For what it's worth, I have deleted the Ukranian slavegirl thread, and the mods are discussing how to deal with the rest of Vinni's output and other similar ranges.

Eventually, yes. After rather a lot of posts.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Azreal13 wrote:
I don't care, I was answering your point about post count.

And my point about post count is related to what that poster finds.