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.

We've had a thread shut down for being contentious when a Nazi showed up to a tourney and wasn't booted. Somehow, this is contentious.

We've had threads shut down in response to GW's statement on how the fascist Imperium is terrible because, uh, *whataboutthecommunistsorsomething* at the precise same time the neo-Nazi Christopher Cantwell was testifying that this is precisely the strategy the white nationalist movement use to fabricate their casus belli (Sines v. Kessler)

We keep having threads shut down for pushing back on racist, sexist and nationalist content in wargames without any sanction for the people bringing this noxious bs into out community (see the recent thread re Arch and it's peaceable closure without citing anyone for denying his racism and antisemitism,)

Is it, then, DakkaDakka's editorial position that Nazi and far-far-right positions are acceptable here, and that the only issue with ex'ressing agreement with antisemitic racism and sexist is the degree to which it will cause the moderators work, rather than any ethical or moral imperative?

Copy sent to journalists.

While I understand the mods can't be present for *every* incident as and when it happens, I still don't understand how certain users are still permitted on this site, or the sanctions held against them (if any) are upheld.

I don't understand why Dakka doesn't make clear what the consequences (if any) of such actions are.

Catulle wrote:
Copy sent to journalists.

Are you for real?

Dakka's position is that political discussion isn't allowed. This is a good thing IMO, because such threads almost always turn into dumpster fires and just result in animosity in the community that probably wouldn't occur if the same discussions were held face to face.

But don't mistake not allowing political discussion with being either pro- or anti- one side of the political spectrum.

The bigger question is why continual violations of rule 1 continued to be allowed. Most of it seems to come from a small group of people of the same political persuasion, hmmm.

Jerram wrote:
The bigger question is why continual violations of rule 1 continued to be allowed. Most of it seems to come from a small group of people of the same political persuasion, hmmm.

"Terrorist ideologies are trying to push into warhammer community spaces so hard that Games Workshop has actually put out a press release on the problem... but my main concern is that name-calling might be going on!" a... hot take, I guess?

Catulle wrote:
Copy sent to journalists.

Really? For what purpose?

Jerram wrote:
The bigger question is why continual violations of rule 1 continued to be allowed. Most of it seems to come from a small group of people of the same political persuasion, hmmm.

It's maybe because I actively avoid political discussions, but what you're describing is not something I've noticed?

But you do have to click the "report" button, if the mods don't notice something I don't really blame them. I have no where near enough data to know if there's a bias in moderating after considering which posts have actually been reported.

posermcbogus wrote:

Jerram wrote:
The bigger question is why continual violations of rule 1 continued to be allowed. Most of it seems to come from a small group of people of the same political persuasion, hmmm.

"Terrorist ideologies are trying to push into warhammer community spaces so hard that Games Workshop has actually put out a press release on the problem... but my main concern is that name-calling might be going on!" a... hot take, I guess?

This is a discussion board so yes from the perspective of this board I'm far more concerned about tactics used to shut down discussion on this board.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Jerram wrote:
The bigger question is why continual violations of rule 1 continued to be allowed. Most of it seems to come from a small group of people of the same political persuasion, hmmm.

It's maybe because I actively avoid political discussions, but what you're describing is not something I've noticed?

But you do have to click the "report" button, if the mods don't notice something I don't really blame them. I have no where near enough data to know if there's a bias in moderating after considering which posts have actually been reported.

It probably is and I have reported once or twice but if a mod closes the topic before I see it talking about the reports its generated I don't feel the need to add on.

A couple of recent examples off the top of my head.

If someone post that they don't agree with Arch's politics but he makes great lore videos --- You're a NAZI

If someone thinks that in addition to banning Nazi analogues from events we should expand to banning Soviet Army and Red Guard Analogues as well then --- You're a NAZI

If someone thinks that Space Marines should stay male -- You're a sexist NAZI

Catulle wrote:


Is it, then, DakkaDakka's editorial position that Nazi and far-far-right positions are acceptable here, and that the only issue with ex'ressing agreement with antisemitic racism and sexist is the degree to which it will cause the moderators work, rather than any ethical or moral imperative?

Copy sent to journalists.

Can you cite an instance where someone actually agreed with this ideology?

It's the usual whattaboutism tactic of not-agreeing but also doing all in their power to shift the topic that makes it hard to do anything about the issue because the rules are made to deal with explicit situation, not the favorite tactic of blurring lines. In the case of the tournament thread it was basically all hinging on the incredibly threadbare argument of "well it's not actually a swastika, and there were plenty of austrian painters so we can never know".

Anyway, nothing will be done about it because no one here is stupid enough to come out and say without subtext that they think white supremacists are right, we'll just enjoy the occasional bouts of "hur hur Arch owned the sjws durr" followed by strawmen of "you said anyone that enjoys arch videos is a nazi". Dakka is basically Facebook of wargaming, except hopefully with a little less horse paste gourmets.

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:

Catulle wrote:


Is it, then, DakkaDakka's editorial position that Nazi and far-far-right positions are acceptable here, and that the only issue with ex'ressing agreement with antisemitic racism and sexist is the degree to which it will cause the moderators work, rather than any ethical or moral imperative?

Copy sent to journalists.

Can you cite an instance where someone actually agreed with this ideology?

Oh, nobody outright agrees with it. They're smarter than that.

But what we saw being flagrantly displayed in the two threads on the Spanish situation was the fascist apologists of Dakka like Formosa and GoldenHorde reading from the standard fascist-apologist playbook of "But but but whatabout antifa / communists / cancel culture." False equivalencies, fearmongering about communism, complaints about those mean old antifa, all the familiar old smokescreens that fascists have been using since the 1920's to try and legitimise themselves and play the victim.

We all know Dakka mods have a policy of "shut down threads for being flamey, pay no attention to who's carrying the gasoline can and box of matches", and you can be as toxic as you like on here without getting banned, so long as you cynically and carefully dance juuuuust within the letter of the law, but this really is a new degree of laziness from them.

Here's what your job here is, mods: You ban the fascist apologists. Yes, I'm backseat modding, because I'm seeing no signs that anyone is in the front seat.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
While I understand the mods can't be present for *every* incident as and when it happens, I still don't understand how certain users are still permitted on this site, or the sanctions held against them (if any) are upheld.

I don't understand why Dakka doesn't make clear what the consequences (if any) of such actions are.

In my experience its because a lot of people don't actually report things and interpreting insult from jabs/pokes or otherwise general banter or chatter can be difficult. Esp as sometimes insults are not always interpreted the same by different people and because sometimes they are wrapped up with general discussion. Sometimes over many threads/posts.

Also sometimes a person starts breaking rules and insulting others, but only because those others have spent ages winding that person up in subtle ways to get such a result. Which is an absolute nightmare to spot and stop.


edit - also sometimes by the time things do get reported person a and person b have started trading insults. So what was one person insulting turns into two or more in a fight. Again this might well sprawl over many days and many threads. In the end it doesn't matter who started what, but you can bet neither side considers themselves in the wrong

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Dakka's position is that political discussion isn't allowed. This is a good thing IMO, because such threads almost always turn into dumpster fires and just result in animosity in the community that probably wouldn't occur if the same discussions were held face to face.

But don't mistake not allowing political discussion with being either pro- or anti- one side of the political spectrum.

And in practice what that means is you can get topics that should be simple matters of science (like Covid or climate changed or Nazis being anything other than the very worst of humankind) successfully blocked off from discussion by dragging politics into them, meaning that Dakka moderation has effectively sided with the crazy side of the political spectrum by not shutting down their obvious derailing tactics.

 Elemental wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Dakka's position is that political discussion isn't allowed. This is a good thing IMO, because such threads almost always turn into dumpster fires and just result in animosity in the community that probably wouldn't occur if the same discussions were held face to face.

But don't mistake not allowing political discussion with being either pro- or anti- one side of the political spectrum.

And in practice what that means is you can get topics that should be simple matters of science (like Covid or climate changed or Nazis being anything other than the very worst of humankind) successfully blocked off from discussion by dragging politics into them, meaning that Dakka moderation has effectively sided with the crazy side of the political spectrum by not shutting down their obvious derailing tactics.

At the same time Dakka is a wargame board for models and model socialising. It's not really a general Facebook-all-comers site.

The mods and site aren't built for politics or any of those other subjects at their core and when those subjects cause too much trouble or division/friction within the community its right to shut them down and focus on the core area - wargames, models, painting, geek culture and such.

I think if people feel like they can't engage with the community on those core subjects then Dakka is perhaps not the site for them at this time for those interests.

 Overread wrote:

At the same time Dakka is a wargame board for models and model socialising. It's not really a general Facebook-all-comers site.

The mods and site aren't built for politics or any of those other subjects at their core and when those subjects cause too much trouble or division/friction within the community its right to shut them down and focus on the core area - wargames, models, painting, geek culture and such.

I think if people feel like they can't engage with the community on those core subjects then Dakka is perhaps not the site for them at this time for those interests.

Like I said in the post you're replying to, things that should be non-political can be reliably shut down by dragging politics into them. The mods passing no judgement on people who push crazy political views where they don't belong informs the bad actors that they can get away with this sort of stuff, and that Dakka is a place amenable to fascist apologism, climate change deniers and covidiots.

You can talk about politics just fine, just derail a thread and get it closed. And then just keep on doing it until a topic is unapproachable because it's "political".

If Dakka is meant to be non-political, ban people who keep doing this, don't play into their hands.

 Elemental wrote:

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:

Catulle wrote:


Is it, then, DakkaDakka's editorial position that Nazi and far-far-right positions are acceptable here, and that the only issue with ex'ressing agreement with antisemitic racism and sexist is the degree to which it will cause the moderators work, rather than any ethical or moral imperative?

Copy sent to journalists.

Can you cite an instance where someone actually agreed with this ideology?

Oh, nobody outright agrees with it. They're smarter than that.

But what we saw being flagrantly displayed in the two threads on the Spanish situation was the fascist apologists of Dakka like Formosa and GoldenHorde reading from the standard fascist-apologist playbook of "But but but whatabout antifa / communists / cancel culture." False equivalencies, fearmongering about communism, complaints about those mean old antifa, all the familiar old smokescreens that fascists have been using since the 1920's to try and legitimise themselves and play the victim.

We all know Dakka mods have a policy of "shut down threads for being flamey, pay no attention to who's carrying the gasoline can and box of matches", and you can be as toxic as you like on here without getting banned, so long as you cynically and carefully dance juuuuust within the letter of the law, but this really is a new degree of laziness from them.

Here's what your job here is, mods: You ban the fascist apologists. Yes, I'm backseat modding, because I'm seeing no signs that anyone is in the front seat.

Ahh yes the shouts of what about ism to shut down conversation.

The job of the Mods is to create an environment where conversation can occur, to many people here want an echo chamber. Go back and look at why Dakka was started, as a place to recapture the environment he felt at his FLGS. So if I'm running a FLGS its not going to be the person saying "Black Templars are cool" whose causing a disturbance, its the person screaming that they must be fascist apologist that's the problem.

Jerram wrote:

Ahh yes the shouts of what about ism to shut down conversation.

The job of the Mods is to create an environment where conversation can occur, to many people here want an echo chamber. Go back and look at why Dakka was started, as a place to recapture the environment he felt at his FLGS. So if I'm running a FLGS its not going to be the person saying "Black Templars are cool" whose causing a disturbance, its the person screaming that they must be fascist apologist that's the problem.

Thank you for providing a textbook example of what I'm talking about.

It's those mean ol' lefties who are "screaming" and trying to "make an echo chamber"? Check.

Attempts to pretend the anger didn't stem from an open Nazi at a tournament not being insta-banned and shamed. but rather it was directed at someone who liked a particular type of Space Marines. Check. You're pushing the narrative (straight out of that familiar playbook) that this is about hysterical lefties wanting to suppress free speech, rather than an inexplicable debate about if a literal Nazi should be permitted at a tournament.

At a guess, you're trying to get this thread locked too. We'll see if that tactic works, I guess.

A handy little hint for people - in a thread which is essentially "hey these Nazi folk are bad" you can just say "Yeah they sure are" and be done with it.

Rather than going, "uhhhmhmhmhm not as bad as them commies".

Y'see because it immediately seems like you are defending Nazis. And then you get all flustered and defensive and say you aren't a little closet fascist actually . You're just a big fan of Hugo Boss uniforms or something. Grey really suits your eyes.

If the thread was about why diddling kids was bad and you start up your "uhmhmm no actually" whatabouttery posts people are going to pretty swiftly assume you're a nonce.

Frankly who has the time in a day to argue politics on a forum about little plastic toys?

Of course it will work. I do love the "you just want an echo chamber" argument when what's happening is basically "I don't want any of my views or statements challenged"
Basically, since dakka is apolitical, everyone should be able to say whatever they want, and no one should be able to disagree. Cause disagreement is the worst sin. If I were to say "we should skin all rich alive" it's apolitical, if you write "actually that's effd up" then it's dragging politics into it.
Wearing a funny swastika to a tournament is not political, saying "hey, maybe we shouldn't let people bring in hate symbols to tournaments" is political.

Jerram wrote:

posermcbogus wrote:

Jerram wrote:
The bigger question is why continual violations of rule 1 continued to be allowed. Most of it seems to come from a small group of people of the same political persuasion, hmmm.

"Terrorist ideologies are trying to push into warhammer community spaces so hard that Games Workshop has actually put out a press release on the problem... but my main concern is that name-calling might be going on!" a... hot take, I guess?

This is a discussion board so yes from the perspective of this board I'm far more concerned about tactics used to shut down discussion on this board.

That's cool. So am I. That's why I'm glad that people are hostile to fascists, who by definition hate free speech, and are trying to re-route the discussion of little toys to their sick terrorist fantasies are becoming more and more unwelcome here. Glad we're on the same page.

Jerram wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Jerram wrote:
The bigger question is why continual violations of rule 1 continued to be allowed. Most of it seems to come from a small group of people of the same political persuasion, hmmm.

It's maybe because I actively avoid political discussions, but what you're describing is not something I've noticed?

But you do have to click the "report" button, if the mods don't notice something I don't really blame them. I have no where near enough data to know if there's a bias in moderating after considering which posts have actually been reported.

It probably is and I have reported once or twice but if a mod closes the topic before I see it talking about the reports its generated I don't feel the need to add on.

A couple of recent examples off the top of my head.

If someone post that they don't agree with Arch's politics but he makes great lore videos --- You're a NAZI

If someone thinks that in addition to banning Nazi analogues from events we should expand to banning Soviet Army and Red Guard Analogues as well then --- You're a NAZI

If someone thinks that Space Marines should stay male -- You're a sexist NAZI

LMAO Arch makes lore videos full of stolen art, lifted from Fandom wikis in a faux-british accent - which as someone who grew up in the UK, is utterly atrocious - that sounds like the audio equivalent of drinking sand mixed with vinegar, mushy peas and cod liver oil, whenever he isn't too busy with his weekly shoesize IQ conspiracy theory about why this time GW have totally financially collapsed, no for real this time Chicken Little bs.

You might have a point if GW were having to route other extremists. You might have a point if there was recent evidence of someone wearing other extremist symbology at a Warhammer event. But you don't.

I for one am glad that the mods are cracking down on Arch's bs being posted here, not only because it's dogwhistle crap, but also because it always starts drama, because people want to defend his overt racism. It's a headache for them to moderate that, and it's a headache for decent folk who don't want to have to tolerate the utter waste of server space that filth takes up.
The less that we make this forum a haven for terrorist ideologies, the better.

I am not willing to peacefully share breathing space with nazis, ever, because they have no interest in sharing breathing space with me.

Cronch wrote:
Of course it will work. I do love the "you just want an echo chamber" argument when what's happening is basically "I don't want any of my views or statements challenged"
Basically, since dakka is apolitical, everyone should be able to say whatever they want, and no one should be able to disagree. Cause disagreement is the worst sin. If I were to say "we should skin all rich alive" it's apolitical, if you write "actually that's effd up" then it's dragging politics into it.
Wearing a funny swastika to a tournament is not political, saying "hey, maybe we shouldn't let people bring in hate symbols to tournaments" is political.

I explicitly want discussion, the opposite of don't challenge my statements. The OP explicitly wants certain views shut down, you know don't challenge my views. Can you be any more dishonest ?

Jerram wrote:

Cronch wrote:
Of course it will work. I do love the "you just want an echo chamber" argument when what's happening is basically "I don't want any of my views or statements challenged"
Basically, since dakka is apolitical, everyone should be able to say whatever they want, and no one should be able to disagree. Cause disagreement is the worst sin. If I were to say "we should skin all rich alive" it's apolitical, if you write "actually that's effd up" then it's dragging politics into it.
Wearing a funny swastika to a tournament is not political, saying "hey, maybe we shouldn't let people bring in hate symbols to tournaments" is political.

I explicitly want discussion, the opposite of don't challenge my statements. The OP explicitly wants certain views shut down, you know don't challenge my views. Can you be any more dishonest ?

And yet again, for reasons only known to yourself, you leave out that the views the OP wants shutting down are those who try and make excuses for or whatabout on behalf of Nazis.

Jerram wrote:

Cronch wrote:
Of course it will work. I do love the "you just want an echo chamber" argument when what's happening is basically "I don't want any of my views or statements challenged"
Basically, since dakka is apolitical, everyone should be able to say whatever they want, and no one should be able to disagree. Cause disagreement is the worst sin. If I were to say "we should skin all rich alive" it's apolitical, if you write "actually that's effd up" then it's dragging politics into it.
Wearing a funny swastika to a tournament is not political, saying "hey, maybe we shouldn't let people bring in hate symbols to tournaments" is political.

I explicitly want discussion, the opposite of don't challenge my statements. The OP explicitly wants certain views shut down, you know don't challenge my views. Can you be any more dishonest ?

Aye mate, the views of Nazis, do we need to be listening to them? What fascinating things do they have to tell us all? Please enlighten us.

 Olthannon wrote:
A handy little hint for people - in a thread which is essentially "hey these Nazi folk are bad" you can just say "Yeah they sure are" and be done with it.

Rather than going, "uhhhmhmhmhm not as bad as them commies".

Y'see because it immediately seems like you are defending Nazis. And then you get all flustered and defensive and say you aren't a little closet fascist actually . You're just a big fan of Hugo Boss uniforms or something. Grey really suits your eyes.

If the thread was about why diddling kids was bad and you start up your "uhmhmm no actually" whatabouttery posts people are going to pretty swiftly assume you're a nonce.

Frankly who has the time in a day to argue politics on a forum about little plastic toys?

Any thread where you just want everyone to copy paste "Yeah they sure are" as a response really doesn't belong on a DISCUSSION board since there is you know no discussion. Besides people who want to think through a proper proactive policy rather than a quick knee jerk reactive policy are not engaged in whataboutism or defending Nazism, they just want well thought out policies.

He never said want though. He said "can".

Also how much more of a well thought out policy do you want than:
"Nazis are bad, no Nazis." Like, seems like a very simple one here.

 Olthannon wrote:

Jerram wrote:

Cronch wrote:
Of course it will work. I do love the "you just want an echo chamber" argument when what's happening is basically "I don't want any of my views or statements challenged"
Basically, since dakka is apolitical, everyone should be able to say whatever they want, and no one should be able to disagree. Cause disagreement is the worst sin. If I were to say "we should skin all rich alive" it's apolitical, if you write "actually that's effd up" then it's dragging politics into it.
Wearing a funny swastika to a tournament is not political, saying "hey, maybe we shouldn't let people bring in hate symbols to tournaments" is political.

I explicitly want discussion, the opposite of don't challenge my statements. The OP explicitly wants certain views shut down, you know don't challenge my views. Can you be any more dishonest ?

Aye mate, the views of Nazis, do we need to be listening to them? What fascinating things do they have to tell us all? Please enlighten us.

At this point WTF are you talking about, you're either being intentionally obtuse as to my response to cronch or intentionally dishonest. Let me give you a nice summary of how we got here.

OP: There's NAZIs here they need to be banned.
Me: You've already demonstrated you call people NAZIs for bogus reasons to shut them down.
Cronch: You just don't want your views challenged.
Me: I'm not the one calling for views to be shut down.
You: NAZI

Jerram wrote:
Any thread where you just want everyone to copy paste "Yeah they sure are" as a response really doesn't belong on a DISCUSSION board since there is you know no discussion. Besides people who want to think through a proper proactive policy rather than a quick knee jerk reactive policy are not engaged in whataboutism or defending Nazism, they just want well thought out policies.

Nazis are undeserving of serious discussion beyond "kick them out, shame them, deplatform them", and the same goes for their craven, cowardly apologists who try to cower behind the same free speech that Nazis tear down every chance they get.

That's your well-thought out policy right there. A uniquely disgusting political stance can have a uniquely dismissive reception.

 Elemental wrote:

Jerram wrote:

Cronch wrote:
Of course it will work. I do love the "you just want an echo chamber" argument when what's happening is basically "I don't want any of my views or statements challenged"
Basically, since dakka is apolitical, everyone should be able to say whatever they want, and no one should be able to disagree. Cause disagreement is the worst sin. If I were to say "we should skin all rich alive" it's apolitical, if you write "actually that's effd up" then it's dragging politics into it.
Wearing a funny swastika to a tournament is not political, saying "hey, maybe we shouldn't let people bring in hate symbols to tournaments" is political.

I explicitly want discussion, the opposite of don't challenge my statements. The OP explicitly wants certain views shut down, you know don't challenge my views. Can you be any more dishonest ?

And yet again, for reasons only known to yourself, you leave out that the views the OP wants shutting down are those who try and make excuses for or whatabout on behalf of Nazis.

Because thats BS, just because the OP and people like the OP want to accuse people they disagree with of being NAZIs does not make it so.

 Olthannon wrote:
A handy little hint for people - in a thread which is essentially "hey these Nazi folk are bad" you can just say "Yeah they sure are" and be done with it.

10 years ago I'd've agreed with you, but the word 'Nazi' has been so overused to the point of meaninglessness, where anyone to the right of Chairman Mao is labelled a "nazi", shutting down all discussion.

Granted, that's not really a problem here (only in the weird imagination of some of our membership who see phantom "nazis" hiding under every stone and behind every tree), but more of a general observation.