"This Might Also Be Helpful...Or Not" Topic

That this thread has taken so many turns is I think evident. I hope I detect something of a ‘new dawn' in that the few disruptive elements and their gang-warfare tactics against any individual who disagrees with them are no longer being tolerated by the majority and there appears to be almost a degree of ‘community policing' going on.

Bill, whilst it cannot be denied that your side has somehow acquired the perceived support of a number of the neutrals i do feel that you are being hypocritical by effectively stating that all the 'bad behaviour' has come from one side only.

Despite my impressive acceleration in stifles (or maybe because of it) I have quietly retired from frontline combat on the Napoleonic boards. It's worthless in any case as the place is so heavily moderated that my speciality is effectively completely negated.

For those not in the Hollins et al camp (notice, no use of any unpleasant terms – although apparently the general population here find that to be quite tolerable) I'd be careful what you wish for. SHS is an unpleasant piece of work (being suitably scholarly does not somehow open the doors to being an offensive so-and-so) who would get a kicking if he behaved in public like he does on forums. Sadly that is the biggest problem with the internet. It has masculated the runt.

The vaunted 'new dawn' will last until somebody else disagrees with the New Order and then they'll get the same overbearing treatment that we have been so falsely accused of.

I always thought of Steven's behavior as a long, running parody of some of the more sanctimonious, sectarian, and hypersensitive members of the community. Some of them were bullying (virtually screaming at him, hurling invective, and aggressively campaigning to get him banned), while simultaneously proclaiming their martyrdom as an oppressed minority.

Recall the various threads that were started for the purpose of enlisting supporters in a "ban Steven" movement, including a fairly hilarious (and unsuccessful) attempt to ban him for being a bigot who made "class attacks" against a certain nationality. It's more than a little disingenuous to demand somebody's ouster because they make fun of how you scream at them.

A gratuitous button-pusher? Yes, that's Steven. Those were some pretty big, red flashing buttons, but it's still his fault for pushing them. In the end, most of the pyrotechnics did not emanate from him.

The last posts, in particular thanks to Graf Bretlach and Sotnik were in particular very helpfull.

All who are able to think analytically will be able to make up their mind.

Tousard, in my view is no translation of DeScheel and in case anybody cites DeScheels, it should be a book authored by DeScheel and in case Tousard is cited, then please cite Tousard.

As to Steve Smith, why should he have any motivation to come back to TMP? To look for more abuse? To get is generosity mistreaten?

Many thanks to mysterious newcomer Sotnik for helping clear this up (IMO).

Old Bear, well said mate

I thought about this and if "we" and a couple of others like us were not here to stand up against holllins and his milky white angels they would indeed establish some kind of "new order" just to dominate the boards. However, I think most people here, the average indifferent bystander would simply get bored !! Eventually the milky white brigade would find their self gratification and boasting eventually become boring to the masses and lose their power. Subsequently they would start to bicker amongst themselves and begin to turn on each other because no one is left or interested in arguing with them.

As much as they dislike us they need us because they desire only to be bellicose and beat their chests. Without us there is no debate and argument but what they also fail to understand is they THEY took this to a personal level way before us and it shows in their posts. The continual personal insults and put-downs is atrocious and yet they blame us for it??? go figure…

I am guilty of a great deal of the crap that goes on here and fully admit that. However, how many times can hollins call Kevin a liar and accuse him of such crimes that we do not feel the right to stand up for him? I see Kevin as a friend and I stand up for my mates, a concept I think these guys are unable to accept or understand. Yet when we do we are turned on personally as well.

My whole premis in these arguments was to stand up for Kevin because of hollins constant attacks that have gone on for over a decade. Kevin, if you notice does not stoop to the same gutter level of abuse in his responses and I respect that. However, this only make hollins more frustrated that he tries even harder to provoke him. It is no wonder that I and others have come to his aid to defend him. What else would you expect from friends??? That is the problem, for doing so you get abused as well.

When Gazzola identified this vanity review hollins put up it was for me a perfect way to fight back and let people see just what hollins was like. I felt that hollins was now caught with mud on his face and wanted to make the most of it. For that I also have been subject to a tirade of abuse from hollin's acolytes and I will admit I did not expect any less. hollins obviously has friends as well. However, hollins has also made some very damming claims towards Kevin that I feel are totally undeserved and I stood up for Kevin. What else would you expect me to do? roll over and let it go on? that is not me, I don't like seeing my friends insulted, especially to the low grimy level hollins has stooped to. That is deplorable behaviour and one which for the life of me I cannot understand why Bill has not intervened and don something about.

So now we have a forum that has degenerated into a mire of abuse and counter abuse which has spiralled out of control in which the milky white brigade now feels justified to declare it is all the fault of the other side?? how hypocritical and one eyed can you get!!! I shake my head at you guys now, it is obvious that this "new order" has gained the upper hand due to the indifference of the bystanders who put up with it. This only encourages them to take deeper and lower swipes at anyone who dares disagree with them, counter accuse hollins of despicable behaviour stand up for Kevin.

So for me I am putting up the white flag, you win, I have had enough. I will still visit these boards and discuss matters that I really am interested in but I give up on discussing topics with those who are part of the milky white brigade any longer. I hope you enjoy your newly found empire.

Defiant

Don't leave the site. Just ignore Vanity Hollins and his gang of hypocrites and respond to the interesting posts that attract you. Let the fools wallow in their own fantasy world where they probably believe everything they say is true. It makes them happy and more importantly, it keeps them occupied.

But there are some good posts made now and again, that are well worth reading and reponding to. Just be more selective.

But who is Sotnic, it seems everyone knows the answer but no one will supply it. As I stated before the Napoleonic board is a strange place.

But who is Sotnic, it seems everyone knows the answer but no one will supply it. As I stated before the Napoleonic board is a strange place.

Does it matter? You seem somewhat obsessionnel about who is who. No-one needs to provide their CV in order to post here, it's a public forum.

He's bloke who used to visit here before under a different username (which I have no intention of providing), before being hounded out. Now he's returned with a new username.

He's a jolly helpful chap, a font of knowledge and always polite. Hopefully the denizens of these boards will be kinder to him this time around. I'd prefer to see some of the usual suspects gone than Sotnik.

I reckon he's French, I may be wrong

There. Happy now?

Thanks VW although it seems we have been working in parallel, spotnik has come up with the better information.

So for the first time I'm going to agree with Dave on Gribeaval's career (although i'm not calling him a siege engineer)

Mines a yes vote for the return of SHS, but would he want to?

To spotnik and SHS I recommend the stifle button, stops the distractions and ambushes.

Connard Sage,

Apologie if my post and question offended you this is something I had no intention of doing. I did not know that the discussion was a private one I will certainly desist in asking any further questions regarding Spotnic or any other member of this forum. As I stated the Napoleonic board is a strange place, I will concentrate now on WW2, BTW I am French and extremely proud of the fact and proud of my forefathers who fought in the Grande Armee under the command of Napoleon.

Serge Degar

I think SHS's argument is with the Editor, and I don't think he is inclined right now to make TMP a better product through his generosity.

Connard,

Unnecessary. You sound more like Defiant.

Bill

HJ – you got it right on the money.

I may point out as well that these guys here talk with SHS
all the time on NSF so if they want info all they have to do
is ask him and they know it.

Serge – his old handle here was Un ami and if you do a search of
his last handle you will get one page with several links read
them.

James

Apologie if my post and question offended you

No need to apologise to me, I'm not at all offended. I'm not sure that Sotnik wants his former identity revealed, that's all. The internet doesn't do nuance.

BTW I am French

Je sais, j'ai lu votre profil. C'est pour cela que j'ai dit en passant que Spotnik pourrait ętre aussi.

Apologies for doing that to your mother tongue.

Imperiale – It is a bit of an in-joke, so don't worry about it. Do hang around here – the conversations can get a bit esoteric, but there is plenty going on and you can always use the stifle button on the fringe elements. Seems CS has the record stifle count for this board!

That stifle button should be flushed… if you can't
handle the heat … then get out of the kitchen…

Jsmes

Some clever poster over on Yahoo came up with this, and it's just to apropos not to share…

"The problem with quotations on the internet is it is hard to tell if they are authentic"
-- Abraham Lincoln

Dear kind colleagues,

I am NOT NOT NOT worth this much attention – but I do thank all of the members who took the time to say something nice. It is a wonderful gesture and much appreciated.

I am not the TMP member who was known as "un ami". We are neighbors in the summer (our dachas are about 2 km apart), members of the same gaming group and I would count him as a friend. We often have common research interests. I have not spoken to him in a while, as his business is very busy now and he is almost full time in the Kavkaz.

But really, my English is much much better than his!
(Isn't it ?)
I sure hope so, since I am trading improving his French and English against his teaching me the old Kuban Balachka dialect.

But I do try to emulate (see my good English vocabulary skills ?) his gentlemanly style and polite approach to all people and in all circumstances.

Amicalement.

Hee hee, as I said in my posting of 20 April 3:19am on the previous page: "rightly or wrongly"

Anyway, it is great Un Ami's wonderful gentlemanly approach to debating is not a solitary one, and that it has spread to others of his group, and hopefully in time to others of us here too.

Roly

He states he isn't Un Ami

James

I am Un Ami and so is my wife.

(standing up) I AM UN AMI!

Exactement, mon General Brock. That is why I was bragging that I had said "rightly or wrongly" – it *was* wrongly!

My superbly attuned detective-like sixth sense had told me that people were barking up the wrong tree in saying he was "Un Ami" ;-)

Ya he could be just about anyone maybe Chuvak could
even be SHS you never know…

I am guilty of a great deal of the crap that goes on here and fully admit that

Well, It's a start I suppose.

LE FIN!

Possibly…but then again….

Till next time?

Oh, will there be one? After all, our two so-alled "expert" reviewers seem to be using some pretty dodgy thirdhand material in their claims to expertise! The staff thread in books is pretty similar.

Next time, they can be merely reminded of this time!

Well perhaps we can look forward to reviews by people who know what they are writing about, but I doubt it.

Bill

It seems that when some people place themselves into a fantasy world, they either find it impossible to escape or don't want to leave because they just can't cope with people disagreeing with them and having their own opinions. Very sad really.

Why someone should be required to have a greater knowledge of the size of the pinheads on the lapel buttons of the 3rd Serbo Croat Legere in June 1807 and be fluent in 17 more pre modern languages than the author in order to comment on his Osprey is beside me.
Unless the entire point of the review is the size of the pinheads in serbian millivorts.

If I was looking for an Osprey to tell me enough info to make a 6mm wargames unit then Id want a review that reviewed that.
Someone with wargames experience and a handful of Ospreys would probably the very best person to do that for me.

That would also, for instance, make a low rating due to it being plagiarised from a few other sources irrelevant too.
If it cobbled together 5 different Ospreys and online sources so I only had to buy one and look in one place, I really dont care if the authors true standing as a worthy historian of immense knowledge is questionable or not.

If I wanted in depth bean counting history I would be buying a history book not an Osprey.

Whether G was a seige engineer who invented a Viennese pastry or was second only to Newton in scientific advance is not going to help me roll triple 6 to get the Portuguese Ordenza to stand firm is it now.

JeffsaysHi

Well said mate. It is what the reviewers are saying that counts, not who they are. You can compare reviews and see what the negative aspects are, which might, or might not, put the reader off wasting his money.

Considering that publishers and authors are not going to tell the potential customer the negative side of the book, the reviews can often be a great aid to the buyer.

And if a customer does decides not to buy the title, due to what may be exposed in the reviews, they will probably buy another title, which means booksellers won't lose out and another author and publisher will benefit. Quids in all round!

Jeffsayshi,

Even Ospreys regardless of author and subject are aimed at rather more than the gamer who wants to paint 6mm figures, I would say. Although I want that too I don't think you actually need an Osprey for that. I want much more than just a painting-by-numbers picture guide which I can get off the internet these days. I want context which involves at least some history but then my interest in wargaming and history go hand in hand

Reviewing is a skill all its own and as far as non-fiction is concerned generally, in addition to a skilled reviewer, you absolutely do need one who knows the subject matter. Otherwise how can the reviewer know whether it is well researched, the information authentic and the conclusions accurately argued and presented? The simple answer is that they don't.

I could probably review something with a degree of confidence on the late 18th/early 19th century British army but not on any other, but outside that period and the mid 20th century I have no competence to review any book beyond the quality of the paper.

The reviewer has a heavy responsibility to be objective. Many amateurs on sites such as Amazon are not only unskilled but are also opinionated. Some are serial-reviewers who just use its anarchy as a soapbox and cannot possibly have the breadth of knowledge to comment on the vast array of different historical subjects that they pretend they do. They are just giving their inner ear something to do if you know what I mean.

Perhaps I am particularly discriminating but if I am reading a review I expect analysis of content, an assessment of the expertise of the author, as well the style and the book's overall worth in comparison to similar books but, most importantly, by somebody competent to make such judgements on all counts. I do want to know about the reviewer for without that information their words are worthless.

Bill

I agree with Bill, in the "real world" I review and publish regularly. However, despite >25 years of wargaming and several bookcases of historical books I would not say I have sufficient competence to review any historical book beyond superficial comments.

Interesting to see how the OP's expertise, displayed in his first post, has been duly ripped to shreds in what followed, while another just feels the need to write something in the ether!

"It seems that when some people place themselves into a fantasy world, they either find it impossible to escape or don't want to leave because they just can't cope with people disagreeing with them and having their own opinions. Very sad really."

Is that a self criticism?

Bill, I don't see a problem with customers reviewing books on Amazon, anyone can say if they like/dislike the writing style, the pictures, layout and how useful it was to them, thats what its there for.

However to start criticizing a book on facts and errors in a review, Amazon is the wrong place, a proper peer review/critique in an appropriate place where your comments can be judged and rejected/accepted by appropriate knowledgeable people.

Jeffsayhi

That is fine, if that is all you want, but some of us enjoy the history as well, and if you like history then it is important what you understand is correct or as close as we can get, wargaming is all about compromise and gameplay, history was real.

Grant's wargaming in history is a brilliant combination of pure history and then the compromise to make an enjoyable game, really looking forward to the next volume.

Mark,

You are quite right. The problem is that too many people take advantage of the opportunity given them by Amazon to review book with the apparent authority of subject matter experts, which usually they are not. Their unskilled and opinionated reviews have the potential to unfairly damage the success of a book.

Bill

What a load of rubbish some people post!

Of course reviews are opinionated! Duh! Reviews are the opinions of the customer who has just bought the book. In other words, those who have actually bought and read the title, as opposed to those who argue against such reviews without even seeing the book!

It is an excellent system in which customers can say what they like about the book they bought or what they don't like about it, something potential customers will not discover in the pre-sales hype. That's the beauty of Amazon reviews. In many cases the reviews might just help persuade potential customers to decide if they should or should not buy a title. But no one is forced to read the reviews or make decisions based on them. That is is entirely up to the potential customer.

It obviously annoys 'some' authors and possibly some publishers, but I don't see a problem with that. If they can't take it, then perhaps any 'annoyed' authors or publishers should consider another business.

But perhaps the real problem lies not with the 'annoyed' author or publisher, but that some people just don't want to see anything negative that might be connected to their author-hero? Tough! Get over it. Move on. Long live Amazon reviews!

"What a load of rubbish some people post!"

True, ironic and true.

Over and over again.

badwargamer

Like I said, those who place themselves into a fantasy world, often can't escape it. Perhaps you will, one day. You have my sympathies until then.

What color did you say the pot was?

General brock

Mine's silver with a golden eagle on it, Hollins and his 'hee-hee' club have glass ones, and you can see right through them.

If I want history I will buy history reviewed by a historian, or at least one with a reputation.
As historian experts on the same subject never agree this will mean getting past all the usual ego manic nonsense and bean counting that comes with it.

If I want an Osprey to paint up some 6mmm units for a wargame I most definitely do not want reviews restricted to self appointed experts of peer groups who scratch each others backs.

In other words I want a review by someone who bought the book for the same purpose as I intend it for, with preferably, but not necessarily, more experience of that type of book. for Ospreys that almost certainly excludes most members of the historians peer group.

Jeffsayshi,

Like you I want reviews by competent persons and that includes reviews of Ospreys. I want to know that the book is accurate when I paint up my 10mm units. I also don't want the "self appointed experts of peer groups who scratch each others backs". That is exactly the kind of person who uses Amazon as a ‘soap-box'. I also prefer reviewers to be literate and know the difference between being opinionated and having an opinion.

Bill

XV Brigada

You keep talking utter rubbish and, for some reason, you are sadly trying to paint Amazon reviewers as all being the same. They are not. Perhaps you need to read some more (and perhaps look at the names, since that seems to be bugging you) before making such a pathetic statement?

Most people, although obvioulsy not you, look at reviews, no matter who wrote them, to see what might be mentioned that will certainly NOT be mentioned in the pre-sales hype. That could be good stuff as well as the bad. It is an aid to the customer – that's you by the way!

But why all the fuss about reviews anyway? If they upset you that much, you can always try to view the book first, rather than just make your decision based on a review, no matter who wrote it or how many stars it was or wasn't given. I'm sure many people do.

And the type of reviewers you have described that you would 'pass' as acceptable, are fellow customers, many who were probably hoping to find what you want to find in a title, but were either disappointed or pleased.

I suggest you read as many reviews as possible. Just enjoy them and stop being silly. You never know, it might save you some cash!

Long live Amazon reviews!

Fruitcakes.

Well at least the thread has a Napoleonic theme.

Bill

Muah ha ha

No, I don't think Amazon reviews will save you fruitcakes, but they will certainly save you cash. Then you can buy as many fruitcakes as you desire!