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.

A troll account with ill intent isn't going to build up a few hundred posts, and if they do then they should be applauded for their dedication.

There's a right and wrong way to raise a discussion about what is acceptable content on the forum, just as there is in life. I'm willing to accept that the mod team took action on a post that the evidence suggested was a disingenuous attempt to stir drama rather than a sincere attempt to open up what is a much broader topic.

That it has done both is probably the best possible outcome, but apparently people are more intent on bashing the mod team for not doing things the way they want than actually engaging on the actually important issue that was raised.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
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?

I'm not sure it's particularly relevant to this thread. Or are we just turning this discussion into a general 'bash the mods' thread now?

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..

Yes, change generally requires discussion.

That discussion would likely have gone more smoothly if it had been approached in an honest and civil fashion, rather than a bunch of people with an axe to grind insulting the mod team and demanding to get their way.

Azreal13 wrote:A troll account with ill intent isn't going to build up a few hundred posts, and if they do then they should be applauded for their dedication.

There's a right and wrong way to raise a discussion about what is acceptable content on the forum, just as there is in life. I'm willing to accept that the mod team took action on a post that the evidence suggested was a disingenuous attempt to stir drama rather than a sincere attempt to open up what is a much broader topic.

I absolutely agree that there's a right and a wrong way, as I said. However, regardless of what way is used, isn't the more relevant thing WHAT they flagged, and not how? That was the gist of my post.

insaniak wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
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?

I'm not sure it's particularly relevant to this thread. Or are we just turning this discussion into a general 'bash the mods' thread now?

If I made a thread on that, would it be an 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..

Yes, change generally requires discussion.

More discussion than I would have thought necessary, over that matter. I thought it wouldn't take that long.

That discussion would likely have gone more smoothly if it had been approached in an honest and civil fashion, rather than a bunch of people with an axe to grind insulting the mod team and demanding to get their way.

Not sure where I, at the very least, "demanded" or "insulted" the mods team. Is stating concerns an insult now?

I'm sorry, but not all comments here have been insulting the mods, and raising concerns isn't "demanding their way" any more so than asking the rules to be followed is.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Azreal13 wrote:A troll account with ill intent isn't going to build up a few hundred posts, and if they do then they should be applauded for their dedication.

There's a right and wrong way to raise a discussion about what is acceptable content on the forum, just as there is in life. I'm willing to accept that the mod team took action on a post that the evidence suggested was a disingenuous attempt to stir drama rather than a sincere attempt to open up what is a much broader topic.

I absolutely agree that there's a right and a wrong way, as I said. However, regardless of what way is used, isn't the more relevant thing WHAT they flagged, and not how? That was the gist of my post.

Not when the question is to whether any action needs to be taken against the poster. Which is a separate question as to whether the thing they're commenting on needs revisiting. The two shouldn't be conflated.

 insaniak wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
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?

I'm not sure it's particularly relevant to this thread. Or are we just turning this discussion into a general 'bash the mods' thread now?

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..

Yes, change generally requires discussion.

That discussion would likely have gone more smoothly if it had been approached in an honest and civil fashion, rather than a bunch of people with an axe to grind insulting the mod team and demanding to get their way.

You were very dismissive about the concerns at the start. It took 4 days and a 2nd poster to even get a response and that was "It was removed as it was off topic for a news and rumours thread, and was a blatant attempt to stir up drama.".

You had to be pestered into actually addressing the issue, though I'll accept that we're more or less there now.

I get that it feels like the mods are being needlessly bashed here, but look at it from the users perspective - from the outside it seems very obscure and draconian.

Herzlos wrote:
You were very dismissive about the concerns at the start. It took 4 days and a 2nd poster to even get a response and that was "It was removed as it was off topic for a news and rumours thread, and was a blatant attempt to stir up drama.".

My initial response was specifically addressing the reason for the removal of a gakpost by a sockpuppet account. It took four days because I generally only check N&B every few days, unless there's a thread in there that I'm specifically following, and the rest of the mod team is thin on the ground at the best of times right now*, and it's Christmas.

You had to be pestered into actually addressing the issue, though I'll accept that we're more or less there now.

When it was questioned, I explained the current policy, and was met with accusations of nefarious intentions. So yes, I quite probably could have handled it better... but I feel that the entire discussion would have gone better if it had been raised with a polite 'Hey, is this sort of content really ok in this day and age?' rather than taking it as an opportunity to dogpile on the mods and the site.


*Edit - and yes, 'hire more mods' would be an ideal solution there. Candidates are currently sparse, and the last couple of people we have offered the position to have (not entirely surprisingly) turned it down. So we're left doing the best we can with the few bodies we have.

You think it was a gak post, many who have commented here disagree with that evaluation.

 insaniak wrote:

*Edit - and yes, 'hire more mods' would be an ideal solution there. Candidates are currently sparse, and the last couple of people we have offered the position to have (not entirely surprisingly) turned it down. So we're left doing the best we can with the few bodies we have.

Which leads to the obvious question of why people are turning it down and why isn't that surprising. I thought that most enthusiast forums would have plenty of long timey posters who'd be happy to pitch in with moderating assuming that the site and moderation wasn't toxic.

I'm certainly not a candidate for moderation, but I think addressing the root cause may be a bit of work but might make life a lot easier for all you in the long run.

Most people, myself included, do not have the patience to be mods. Not all those that want to be mods ought to be. It's a thankless job.

 insaniak wrote:


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.

So, I feel like I've given dakka the benefit of the doubt long enough for this to be resolved internally, but has anything actually changed? It's been about 3 weeks since this post saying you deleted it and are "discussing" how to deal with it. Honestly though, given dakka's moderation history, this just feels exactly like doing the easiest thing again. Whether or not you intend it to come off this way, it once again feels like the issue is being swept under a rug with the evidence deleted to protect vinni's current range and to make it harder to inform people of who they're buying from.

What's the conclusion? What's the outcome? Something must have been discussed or talked about during those three weeks.

Wolfblade, the discussion is ongoing. Unfortunately due to the holidays and life commitments of all involved it is taking longer than is ideal but we have a pretty solid basis of understanding formed between the moderators and owners and hope to get a finalised revision to the rules out soon. Part of this will be a toughening on Dakka's hosting of questionable material.

As far as this pertains to Vinni himself, we will probably not be allowing his more NSFW material (and this goes for companies in similar vein) but we are not going to boot him from the site over a decade old miniature. He himself fled Russia around eight years ago and since then we have seen no evidence to support justification for his removal, bar this one reprehensible miniature from 2012.

 ingtaer wrote:
Wolfblade, the discussion is ongoing. Unfortunately due to the holidays and life commitments of all involved it is taking longer than is ideal but we have a pretty solid basis of understanding formed between the moderators and owners and hope to get a finalised revision to the rules out soon. Part of this will be a toughening on Dakka's hosting of questionable material.

As far as this pertains to Vinni himself, we will probably not be allowing his more NSFW material (and this goes for companies in similar vein) but we are not going to boot him from the site over a decade old miniature. He himself fled Russia around eight years ago and since then we have seen no evidence to support justification for his removal, bar this one reprehensible miniature from 2012.

Did any mod actually look through vinni's thread? There's a LOT of rape slave stuff.

Plus, that mini is still being sold to day so...

EDIT: Unsure how to copy the link to the posts, so I'll just quote them like this.

 Brother Vinni wrote:

Not-April being bound up and exposed has obvious sexual and non-consensual implications.

 Brother Vinni wrote:

Naked bound slave, don't think I need to say more.

 Brother Vinni wrote:

Again, another naked slavegirl.

 Brother Vinni wrote:

Similar to the second one I quoted here.

Before anyone accuses me of digging through the history of their thread, I went back one page. The issue is not "one bad model from 2012." That's just the most blatant.

 ingtaer wrote:
we will probably not be allowing his more NSFW material (and this goes for companies in similar vein)

 ingtaer wrote:

 ingtaer wrote:
we will probably not be allowing his more NSFW material (and this goes for companies in similar vein)

I think you missed my point. My point is that this isn't an issue about one model from 2012 as I said. This is not really about one atrocious model from over 10 years ago. It's a consistent posting of very sexual and offensive models. It isn't the nudity that's the issue for most of us I believe, it's how the nudity is used.

Which is why we are looking at banning such content.

 Wolfblade wrote:
Whether or not you intend it to come off this way, it once again feels like the issue is being swept under a rug with the evidence deleted to protect vinni's current range and to make it harder to inform people of who they're buying from.

So to be clear - do you want Vinni removed from the site, or do you want people to be able to see what sort of company they are buying from? Because those two goals would seem to be mutually exclusive.

What's the conclusion? What's the outcome? Something must have been discussed or talked about during those three weeks.

Those three weeks were over the Christmas period, when a lot of the mod team is not particularly active. If you want an approach that isn't just the 'easiest choice' then you need to allow for some time to actually look at the ramifications of any given decision.

 insaniak wrote:

 Wolfblade wrote:
Whether or not you intend it to come off this way, it once again feels like the issue is being swept under a rug with the evidence deleted to protect vinni's current range and to make it harder to inform people of who they're buying from.

So to be clear - do you want Vinni removed from the site, or do you want people to be able to see what sort of company they are buying from? Because those two goals would seem to be mutually exclusive.

Personally, I don't think they should be allowed to advertise their store on the site. Regardless of whether their rape slave models are posted here or not, you go to their website and you very obviously see them, and I don't think that's something dakka should support or allow. However, it does feel a little dishonest to paint it as if I (and others) will only accept those solutions.

 insaniak wrote:

What's the conclusion? What's the outcome? Something must have been discussed or talked about during those three weeks.

Those three weeks were over the Christmas period, when a lot of the mod team is not particularly active. If you want an approach that isn't just the 'easiest choice' then you need to allow for some time to actually look at the ramifications of any given decision.

To be fair, it's been 3 weeks since the quoted post, nearly 4 from the OP. Maybe I wasn't clear, I was hoping for an update, some kind of communication that dakka tends not to do with anyone outside of the mod circle. Things get deleted or removed or banned or whatever and there's rarely a chance for any sort of community input or understanding on the decision or discussion.

 Wolfblade wrote:
Personally, I don't think they should be allowed to advertise their store on the site. Regardless of whether their rape slave models are posted here or not, you go to their website and you very obviously see them, and I don't think that's something dakka should support or allow. However, it does feel a little dishonest to paint it as if I (and others) will only accept those solutions.

You've been fairly vocal on the idea that you'll only accept the solution you deem correct. I'm just trying to establish how that solution is intended to work. How does not allowing Vinni to advertise on the site make it easier to inform people what sort of miniatures he produces?

To be clear - There is certainly a valid argument for not allowing him to share his wares here on the basis that he makes some awful stuff. I'm just confused about the inherent contradiction in what you're asking for. Scrubbing something from the site doesn't improve awareness of it.

To be fair, it's been 3 weeks since the quoted post, nearly 4 from the OP. Maybe I wasn't clear, I was hoping for an update, some kind of communication that dakka tends not to do with anyone outside of the mod circle. Things get deleted or removed or banned or whatever and there's rarely a chance for any sort of community input or understanding on the decision or discussion.

The update is that we're working on it, and due to the time of year and other demands on the time of the volunteers who make up the moderating team, that discussion is not a quick process. We are discussing policy and site rules changes, and these will be implemented once the kinks are worked out.

 insaniak wrote:

 Wolfblade wrote:
Personally, I don't think they should be allowed to advertise their store on the site. Regardless of whether their rape slave models are posted here or not, you go to their website and you very obviously see them, and I don't think that's something dakka should support or allow. However, it does feel a little dishonest to paint it as if I (and others) will only accept those solutions.

You've been fairly vocal on the idea that you'll only accept the solution you deem correct. I'm just trying to establish how that solution is intended to work. How does not allowing Vinni to advertise on the site make it easier to inform people what sort of miniatures he produces?

To be clear - There is certainly a valid argument for not allowing him to share his wares here on the basis that he makes some awful stuff. I'm just confused about the inherent contradiction in what you're asking for. Scrubbing something from the site doesn't improve awareness of it.

As I said, either is fine by me personally. Don't take my dislike of the mods deleting a post designed to inform people of who they were buying from while leaving the entirety of the content up. Also, I think you're boiling the "solutions" down to "do nothing" and "do something." I do not think vinni's type of content is acceptable here, and I don't think an acceptable response is the equivalent of a shoulder shrug based on the site's rules.

To be fair, it's been 3 weeks since the quoted post, nearly 4 from the OP. Maybe I wasn't clear, I was hoping for an update, some kind of communication that dakka tends not to do with anyone outside of the mod circle. Things get deleted or removed or banned or whatever and there's rarely a chance for any sort of community input or understanding on the decision or discussion.

The update is that we're working on it, and due to the time of year and other demands on the time of the volunteers who make up the moderating team, that discussion is not a quick process. We are discussing policy and site rules changes, and these will be implemented once the kinks are worked out.

And I never disagreed or said you weren't.

 ingtaer wrote:
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?

IMO the standard should be something like "what would you see in an art museum":

Non-sexual nude miniatures are just following in the long tradition of artistic nude paintings and sculptures, they can stay. They should have a mandatory NSFW warning for obvious reasons but I don't see anything wrong with a 28mm version of a sculpture you can find in every art museum.

Blatant rape fetish stuff of questionable artistic merit that is made for the sole purpose of the sculptor getting off to it? Hell no. They aren't even good sculpts, the appeal is 100% pornography and shock value and if someone tried to put them on the table at your local store it would (or at least should!) raise some major questions about their intentions and understanding of boundaries. So no, they don't need to be advertised on a site that bans profanity because it isn't suitable for all ages.

Kingdom Death is probably ok IMO, they have sex and nudity but from what I've seen it's primarily meant to be disturbing, not erotic. It's horror, not some creepy dude in his parents basement posting his sexual fantasies, and the sculpts are good enough to have artistic merit. You might not take your kids to that wing of the museum but I could definitely see it being an exhibit. Again, mandatory NSFW though.

The Infinity pinup stuff isn't a great look for the hobby IMO but it's not so egregiously inappropriate that it needs to be banned. It might appear in the museum, but with a sign explaining the cultural context and how it's problematic. It should be allowed, but so should criticism of the models and the company that makes them.

Political models are the same as the pinup stuff. Politics is reality and there's nothing about those miniatures that is any worse than the political cartoons published in your local newspaper. The only issue is dakka's (IMO inappropriate) ban on political discussion and how it creates an awkward double standard where you can post a political message as long as you sculpt a miniature to say it but expressing the same political opinion in text form puts you at risk of getting banned, as does posting disagreement with the political message made by the miniatures. They should be allowed, but so should political discussion.

Ban this, Ban that, Ban them, who gets to decide which companies should be banned from advertising? Should it be only certain models from a company or a blanket ban if some one doesn't like one model. I mean it's starting to sound like a crusade against freedom of expression, next we'll be banning products from entire countries because we don't like their policies.

 Rolsheen wrote:
who gets to decide which companies should be banned from advertising?

The forum owner gets the final say.

Community and moderator members can pitch arguments for and against.

 Rolsheen wrote:
Ban this, Ban that, Ban them, who gets to decide which companies should be banned from advertising? Should it be only certain models from a company or a blanket ban if some one doesn't like one model. I mean it's starting to sound like a crusade against freedom of expression, next we'll be banning products from entire countries because we don't like their policies.

This forum already bans the word because it's "not appropriate for all ages". Freedom of expression doesn't exist on a private forum and banning rape fetish models whose sole appeal is pornography and/shock value, not artistic merit, is entirely in line with the goal of having a forum that is not adults-only.

 Rolsheen wrote:
I mean it's starting to sound like a crusade against freedom of expression, next we'll be banning products from entire countries because we don't like their policies.

Just to be clear, Rolsheen - you're advocating that rape fetish sculpts should be permitted on Dakka, even if they're sculpts of an identifiable individual?

I don't think Vinni and store needs an outright ban - his not creepy work is spectacular and I'd be all for that being here and showcased.

I don't think we want to go as far as policing external sites, assuming the site is predominantly suitable minis and the only stuff on here is suitable i.e. there's a legitimate interest for them being on here.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Aecus Decimus wrote:

IMO the standard should be something like "what would you see in an art museum":

I think art museum is generally a high bar, though it depends entirely on the exhibit. I've seen some pretty NSFW stuff in museums for exhibits like Robert Maplethorpe, or some Anime stuff.

Maybe "would you put it in a display case if you had friends/family visiting?" or "would you bring it out on an open gaming night somewhere?"

Herzlos wrote:
I think art museum is generally a high bar, though it depends entirely on the exhibit. I've seen some pretty NSFW stuff in museums for exhibits like Robert Maplethorpe, or some Anime stuff.

Maybe "would you put it in a display case if you had friends/family visiting?" or "would you bring it out on an open gaming night somewhere?"

Sure. It's the general principle that's important, not the specifics of exactly which venue is the standard. I picked an art museum because it's a place where there's clear precedent for some level of nudity being accepted, and even a degree of provocative sex and nudity when it's making an artistic statement, but not blatant pornography or some 14 year old giggling about how the default human model in their digital sculpting software doesn't start with any clothes. But some variety of "would you display this in public" probably gets to the same end result.

Also, can we get some statement from the mods when a decision is made and what that decision is going forward? It feels like this is just hanging waiting for something to happen.

What about moving potentially objectionable content into its own forum? An 'adults-only' area?

I'm frequently unimpressed with Vinni's work, particularly his unnecessary nudity and obvious IP violations, but there IS a following for it. I say move it elsewhere out of News and Rumors, and make people go look specifically for it.

 insaniak wrote:

The update is that we're working on it, and due to the time of year and other demands on the time of the volunteers who make up the moderating team, that discussion is not a quick process. We are discussing policy and site rules changes, and these will be implemented once the kinks are worked out.

So, it's been another 3 weeks, any update on changes to rules regarding rape fantasy models/nudity models in general/models based on real people?

 Wolfblade wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

The update is that we're working on it, and due to the time of year and other demands on the time of the volunteers who make up the moderating team, that discussion is not a quick process. We are discussing policy and site rules changes, and these will be implemented once the kinks are worked out.

So, it's been another 3 weeks, any update on changes to rules regarding rape fantasy models/nudity models in general/models based on real people?

I'm not convinced harassing the mods is a great strategy.