"Dear Editor: You are dead to me." Topic

TMP link

Do not email me.
Do not start any of my Poll Suggestions as a real Poll. If you feel you "must", just give my prize away to some random person.
If I "win" any more Poll prizes, just give them away to some random person. I don't care who. Make it my stalkers for all I care, if it amuses me.
Do not PM me.
Don't ask me to start any TMP Awards Poll Suggestions.

You do not give a damn how I feel about "OFM Polls", so go fly a kite. Start as many more as you want. Give yourself some yucks. Ha Ha.

I am not "leaving TMP in a huff". I will continue to play here. I will continue to post new threads, and "contribute" as it pleases me to do so.
I just do not want to interact with The Editor in any way.

First to the crime scene!

Bored again John?

Mom and Pop really didn't pay you enough attention, did they now?

The Editor thrives on the sort of bullying that wouldn't be tolerated in any decent elementary school. Shameful.

Allen

Do what you want, John. However, I will not allow you to dictate what TMP members can post about or run polls about.

Well, I think good manners and the Golden Rule would dictate that running polls about someone after they have asked for it to stop should be honored.

David

Well, I think good manners and the Golden Rule would dictate that running polls about someone after they have asked for it to stop should be honored.

However, the principle of Freedom of Speech allows people to express themselves without requiring the prior permission of anyone else. If a TMP member requests a poll, why should someone else have the privilege of vetoing it? If you allow that, then why not allow people to veto discussions on the forums as well? There seems little difference between "don't run polls about me" and "don't talk about me on the forums" – both are attempts to restrict the free speech of others.

Just to be sure about this "freedom of speech" thing, Bill.

If someone suggests a poll derogatory to you, will it fall under "freedom of speech", or be swept under the carpet, never seeing the light of day?

Enquiring minds want to know?

No dog in this hunt, but I do hate a double standard.

TMP is NOT a total free speech zone (nor should it be). The forum rules make that clear.

So the question is not whether one member is dictating or trying to dictate about content; the question is whether harassment is or should be another exception to the general free speech?

I define harassment as keeping on when the subject of the behavior has asked repeatedly that it stop. And I think it should be sanctioned, and I think the poll in question constitutes harassment.

When some one uses my name, that puts me in a privileged position. If i indicate I find the content offensive, my wishes ought to be respected, as outweighing what those who are not named think.

Respectfully, I must agree in this matter with doc mcb.

TVAG

the principle of Freedom of Speech allows people to express themselves without requiring the prior permission of anyone else

Not really. Freedom of speech in most common terms and certainly US law refers to the power of the government to abridge free expression and has absolutely nothing to do with what is or is not allowed on a web site, between individuals or in virtually all non-regulated communication. This site can choose to allow or prohibit speech at will and does by regulating certain words, expressions and behaviors with sanctions for violators, removal of offending text and potentially elimination of the offending person. The use of this site implies acceptance of the rules regarding speech thus we clearly have a regulated speech environment far more vigorous than the classic 'no yelling fire in the theater' rule.

I also have no dog in this fight but I do not believe I have, or should have, the right to personally single out individuals who do not want attention and have clearly expressed that desire. I certainly don't enjoy that as a free speech right in either the legal or broader societal definition.

John has asked for the polls to stop because he finds them demeaning. It's making a joke out of his presence on the forums or him directly. He has requested that it stop and you, Dear Editor, are the only one who can.

If I were the one in the situation, I'd take it quite personal as well. I usually don't chime in on these things as they tend to blow over relatively quickly, but this is too much.

OFM said:
Do not email me.
Do not start any of my Poll Suggestions as a real Poll. If you feel you "must", just give my prize away to some random person.
If I "win" any more Poll prizes, just give them away to some random person. I don't care who. Make it my stalkers for all I care, if it amuses me.
Do not PM me.
Don't ask me to start any TMP Awards Poll Suggestions.

Since you started a topic instead of emailing your concerns to the Editor, adding fuel to the fire you consider yourself a "TMP celebrity". What do you really expect?

Go get a beer, and paint a few figures.

I also agree with Doc and the General. The concept put forth that John is a TMP Celebrity and therefore lacks the same rights as others seems to be a lame excuse for the behavior that is tolerated. I agree John is a larger than life personality, but some of the things being allowed to take place go way too far. If this was done in a business or school it would be clearly defined as harassment. Free speech is a lame excuse and would not hold up in court in such a case. I realize this is Bill's house, but I feel the treatment is unfair and harming the community in general. While I love TMP, the continuation of a situation that could be easily addressed if the Editor followed the rules he himself defined is really starting to get on my nerves. Please just do the right thing and stop all this nonsense.

Jeff

The editor says he doesnt want John to dictate what others say, so can we all swear or say anything we want then? Can I start a poll now saying random person is a fat slob with a bunch more derogatory stuff? I am just a lurker normally but when you have one member asking to not be harassed and you allow it then what does that say about you Bill? It devalues your site in my opinion.

"Respectfully, I must agree in this matter with doc mcb."

I also concur.

Mr. Editor, I do not feel the OFM is "dictating" anything. He made a reasonable and (at first) civil request. It seems to me that honoring that request would be the ethical thing to do. Tell us this: how would TMP be diminished by stopping? What positive thing would we miss out on? Yes, John has repeatedly told us he doesn't care what we think, but clearly now believes we should care what he thinks. However I'd like to see us model good behavior as well as toys. So I must add my voice to chorus, please stop this nonsense.

Gee whiz! Not again!

Lets talk about wargaming and military history and stuff shall we … sigh.

It's pathetic that the Editor hides behind "freedom of speech" to harass members, while simultaneously DH'ing or banning them for utilizing their own freedom of speech to criticize his actions or use words that offend his sensibilities.

On the bright side, now that Freedom of Speech is the defining characteristic of TMP, there won't be any consequences of harassing, defamatory or otherwise offensive speech.

Whatever happened to Polls about the hobby?

I've got The Editors back on this one. The poll in question is not demeaning, it was a light hearted poll proposed months ago and does not violate any of TMP's posting guidelines and is not a personal attack. What is demeaning is the "tantrum" post JtOFM posts every time he doesn't like something followed by a deliberate abuse of the profanity filter so as to be dawghoused and assume the victim role. I have said before, I like John, and have no issues with him, but I think his best course of action would be to ignore petty polls that include his name and go about his business here on TMP, not making a scene and drawing more attention to himself and the poll. I hope John and The Editor, may he live forever, can patch this up and get back to normal, because frankly, it scares me when mom and dad fight.

I respectfully disagree with you Buzzkill,

The same sentiments lead to adults saying that razzing and such by schoolmates is just kids being kids until one of them commits suicide because none of the adults took them seriously. We call it bullying. It is not right. My example is extream, but the idea is valid.

John made a reasonable request that I think would have been granted to most members of TMP. Polls about a person have NOTHING to do with the hobby and serve only to help perpetuate grudges and ill will no matter how harmless some of you feel they are. I am not saying John is in the clear on everything, but neither is the Editor and it takes two to Tango. Lets end this crap and get back to discussing the hobby.

Jeff

Nothing to do with freedom of speech, everything with proper behavior.

Allowing that poll to run is not.

This would be so much easier if OFM just had his own board where he could frolick and post with gleeful abandon.

However, the principle of Freedom of Speech allows people to express themselves without requiring the prior permission of anyone else. If a TMP member requests a poll, why should someone else have the privilege of vetoing it? If you allow that, then why not allow people to veto discussions on the forums as well? There seems little difference between "don't run polls about me" and "don't talk about me on the forums" – both are attempts to restrict the free speech of others.

Wow.

Better start handing out hip boots as poll prizes.

However, the principle of Freedom of Speech allows people to express themselves without requiring the prior permission of anyone else. If a TMP member requests a poll, why should someone else have the privilege of vetoing it? If you allow that, then why not allow people to veto discussions on the forums as well? There seems little difference between "don't run polls about me" and "don't talk about me on the forums" – both are attempts to restrict the free speech of others.

Sorry, Bill but not only is this a fundamental misunderstanding of freedom of speech but this isn't something you practice here on tmp. I have posted in a number of topics that you have removed after the fact for being unrelated to gaming. You disallow political topics. You lock people away for silly things they say.
We also have freedom of religion in this country, but you have forbidden talk about religion. How does that work in your understanding of the first amendment that you are using as a shield?

Perhaps the Editor should spend more time on the news and less time on this.

Then we might have more news.

You lock people away for silly things they say.

Coincidentally and unfortunately, John is currently showing as a locked account.

John the OFM account is locked so much for freedom of speech I guess it only comes from one side as long as you agree with the Editor.

Bill you are wrong

This thing can be kicked around and the issue twisted to suit anybody's point of view. But to cry for fairness on the interwebs means that somebody needs to sit down and have "the talk" with those who offend, but can't be offended.

I don't even know this guy personally (whoever John the OFM is), but have always found him useful and entertaining.

However, I remember reading many a post where he did not exhibit judgement in his applying the "grumpy old man" treatment to new posters or differing opinions. Where are these lines drawn, what do we choose to take isssue with?

How well do we buffer those from the Grumpy treatment? Do we do it as well as "oh no my name is in a poll" situations or are they similar?

If things like this are a big deal, I'd stay off the interwebs entirely until every user is well schooled in coutesy, Strunk and White, and your personal preferences at any given moment.

The interwebs will live on, regardless.

Funny, the people who slated me when I posted a poll suggestion about a "theoretical coup" to take over TMP are now whinging when "Bill's House, Bill's Rules" bites them in the arse

I believe it was Adlai Stevenson who remaked that 'the trouble with Americans is that they haven't read the minutes of the previous meeting'…..

From the TMP FAQ:

"Don't swear."

"No name calling."

"Recent politics are not allowed"

"Can I discuss religion here?
No. [RELIGION RULE]"

"But I think someone is being pushy. Can I call them a Nazi?"
"
No, it only makes you look silly. Similarly, don't irresponsibly throw around terms like commies, pinko's, and fascists. (Maggie Thatcher wasn't a Nazi, so don't call her one…) [NAZI RULE]"

etc,etc,etc..

Someone say something about freedom of speech?

PS: Here's a really interesting snippet from the FAQ:

"What constitutes harassment?
Any member of TMP has the privilege of expressing his opinion. Harassment is when a person goes beyond mere expression of opinion, and begins to wage a "war" on someone or some thing through forum postings.
For example, it's OK to post that you don't like a particular company because they have poor customer service, or you don't like their products. But it's harassment if you follow them from topic to topic, whining about them.
Likewise, you don't have to like everyone who posts on TMP. But it becomes harassment if you follow someone you dislike from topic to topic, deliberately annoying them and disagreeing with them on everything."

This is getting out of hand … I will not be renewing my supporting membership.

I don't care if Bill or John are right or wrong in this matter, but something has to change at TMP, until then my interest will wane as I don't read or post as often as I used to.

I think the solution to the 'John the OFM problem' is to post a health warning on entry to TMP. Something like:

"Caution – this website may contain material that some may find offensive if they try really, really hard. Potential posters are also warned that if they criticise or mock other members, they may get criticised or mocked in return."

Would that satisfy all those who have taken to their chaise-lounges in darkened rooms?

Oh the horror, the horror!

I think sombody should pick on you for a while Sparks and see how you like it, just a suggestion of course..The experience might bring out the Conrad in you a bit more i..

Why are the polls all so moronic?

If someone suggests a poll derogatory to you, will it fall under "freedom of speech", or be swept under the carpet, never seeing the light of day?

Irrelevant, as the current poll wasn't derogatory in any sense.

The editor says he doesnt want John to dictate what others say, so can we all swear or say anything we want then? Can I start a poll now saying random person is a fat slob with a bunch more derogatory stuff?

Obvious, Free Speech is not an absolute right – there's the old "yelling 'fire!' in a crowded theater" argument.

Yet the current poll is not a personal attack on the OFM. Nor is there a coordinated campaign of harassment, as the polls about the OFM have been suggested by a variety of TMP members.

To restate: For the OFM to claim the privilege of dictating "no polls about me" is to restrict the discussion privileges of the TMP community, and I don't see a sufficient case to warrant that.

Sorry, Bill but not only is this a fundamental misunderstanding of freedom of speech but this isn't something you practice here on tmp. I have posted in a number of topics that you have removed after the fact for being unrelated to gaming.

The TMP community voted to make the main wargaming forums limited to wargaming discussions.

<p>You disallow political topics.

More accurately, political discussions are allowed on The Blue Fez, but not on the other forums. Again, this was a policy ratified by TMP community vote, as seen more recently in the "bring back the CA board" poll.

You lock people away for silly things they say.

There's no rule against being silly. But there are other forum rules, explained in the site FAQ, and there are consequences for violating those rules.

We also have freedom of religion in this country, but you have forbidden talk about religion.

Remember that religion was not a forbidden topic originally on TMP, but became so as the result of experience and the wishes of the TMP community.

How does that work in your understanding of the first amendment that you are using as a shield?

My aim is to allow TMP members to have as few restrictions on their freedom of speech on the forums as is practical.

Perhaps the Editor should spend more time on the news and less time on this.

Then we might have more news.

I might take you more seriously if I didn't suspect you were someone who has previously been asked to leave TMP. Your IP address doesn't match your stated location, and your password is… suspicious.

My personal opinion is that this is a load of hogwash, Mr. Editor.

Harrasment is intentional behaviour which can be considered threatening or disturbing. Mr OFM has said he finds the behaviour disturbing, and I can certainly see why. Freedom of speech is recognised as being able to hold and express opinions without fear of censorship. I see no opinion being expressed in the poll, only an attempt at humor at the expense of Mr. OFM, activity which can reasonably be found disturbing and the person in question has indicated he finds disturbing.

In my opinion you should redact the poll and issue a private apology.

G.

Bill,
I just do not understand why you are being so stubborn about this. Basic understanding of polite society suggests that doing something intentionally that knowingly annoys or bothers or harasses someone should be stopped. The polls are not worldchanging or earth-shattering and do not have anything to do with miniatures or wargaming. They are about an indidual who has repeatedly asked for there not to be polls about him. It is just plain rude to continue running these polls whether you have the freedom to do them or not.
David

There seems little difference between "don't run polls about me" and "don't talk about me on the forums" – both are attempts to restrict the free speech of others.

Given I've been banned from TMP on a previous occasion for being critical of our esteemed editor on other fora, that's an interesting statement.

As Gungnir said, there's Freedom of Speech and there is polite behaviour as befits an adult.

Dear Editor:

Is there any chance you could take a break from arguing with people to answer my emails, PMs and posts in the Sponsors forum?

Those going back over 2 weeks, with news that hasnt been posted etc?

I understand that arguing about stupid polls apperat to be more important to you at the moment, but a little bit of attention on the work side of things would be very much appreciated.

D

antenocitisworkshop.com
governanceoftechnology.com

I'm afraid that a lot of the back-and-forth above misses the point. This isn't about free speech; it is about courtesy versus harassment.

TMP is the Editor's creation and property, and I gather also the source of his livelihood. He can run it as he pleases, and he is wise to put restrictions on types of speech such as name calling.

But I gather that keeping TMP operating smoothly on the technical side is very nearly a full time job. Enforcing the rules on the forums in an even-handed way also requires a lot of time, perhaps more than the Editor has.

Like many here' I'm an educator. Keeping a room full of unruly immatures in line -- and TMP has many who fit that description -- requires a firm hand applied CONSISTENTLY. I just don't think the Editor is doing that.

TMP is a community, and one I very much enjoy belonging to. A community is a group of people who have something IN COMMON. What we have in common is, obviously, a love of miniatures and gaming. What in the world do polls such as this have to do with that?

Any community has a certain "tone" or atmosphere, a sense of what sorts of behavior are encouraged, which tolerated, which sanctioned or prohibited.

A poll singling out a specific individual BY NAME, and AFTER he has made it clear he finds such repugnant, should have been rejected by the Editor. It creates the sort of bad atmosphere many of us find distasteful. I agree with Goobar that the poll should be redacted and a private apology issued.

Whether the Editor finds the poll in question innocuous or not doesn't really matter; the object of the poll objects to it, and has made his feelings known well in advance.

A child screaming "Don't touch me! Don't touch me!" may be acting irrationally. But when another child (typically a sibling in my experience) then deliberately reaches out and brushes the screamer with a single pinky, THAT SECOND CHILD IS BEING A TROUBLEMAKER and needs to be sat on, hard.

This poll should never have been run to begin with.

Whilst I do think the poll is poor form a thought does occur to me.

I'm pretty sure that The OFM has publicly questioned why people get upset over being stifled and stifles genaraly, also, why do people get upset at polls and why do people complain about certain threads?

Despite numerous explanations as to why people get upset John has persisted in not undertanding to the point of being obtuse at times. And of course that is his perogative and perhaps he does not relate to the answers hence he persists in questioning why people get upset.

Maybe Bill does not understand why John's got upset over the Polls either?

However, the principle of Freedom of Speech allows people to express themselves without requiring the prior permission of anyone else. If a TMP member requests a poll, why should someone else have the privilege of vetoing it? If you allow that, then why not allow people to veto discussions on the forums as well?

Now that's a load of cobblers. Free Speech does not exist on this website so it's an invalid arguement.

To quote Free Speech and then restrict our use of it smacks of hypocrasy.

I'm with the McBrides on this one. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you," is the appropriate standard, to which "free speech" is no defense. What one can do is never morally or ethically superior to what one should or should not do.

If I am innocently teasing someone, and they ask me to stop, me saying, "oh, it's just a bit of fun," may serve as an explanation of my original view of the situation, but it does not excuse me to continue with the teasing. I am now aware that the other person, for whatever reason, finds my actions towards him objectionable or unpleasant. Therefore, I have a moral responsibility to restrain my behavior towards that individual, as he is the subject of my actions and they affect him directly. It doesn't really matter if I think his reaction is too strong with regards to my intent, or if I think he is being too sensitive, or even if I have a "right" to continue. It matters only that I have a responsibility to respect a reasonable request on his part and curtail my behavior towards him.

While I do think that John overreacted in his public response to the latest poll and towards the editor, nevertheless John had made a respectful and reasonable request to the editor for a moratorium on polls which singled John out for ridicule. I feel that request should have been honored.

Bill, I believe you are in error with this decision, in no small part because you knowingly allowed and encouraged the situation to continue despite John's request that the treatment stop. Claiming you are protecting free speech is disingenuous, and I think you know it. The FAQ clearly states that personal attacks are forbidden, yet after John's request to you, it should have been clear to anyone that John considered the polls to be an attack. And even if you opted not to censor the posting of OFM threads in the Poll Suggestion board, there was never any obligation on your part to turn all or any such threads into actual polls; that was your action, not the free speech action of someone else.

As I have stated elsewhere, I believe this situation should be resolved immediately by mutual apologies all around, with the thing cast into the past. This is not a time for trumped up pride or self-justification. It has already gone far beyond the level of reasonable reaction. Let's dial it down and get back to being friends.

"Dear Editor: You are dead to me."

Lol, too funny!

Doug defending pedophilia… Freedom of speech.
People harassing OFM… Freedom of speech.

OFM complaining about being harassed… Bill's House Bill's Rules.
Bangorstu writing about TMP elsewhere on the web… Bill's House Bill's Rules.

Do OFM and Allen get a prorated refund for their financial support of this site since they are now banned?