| Gwydion | 30 Oct 2013 9:34 a.m. PST |
I simply wanted John Treadaway to acknowledge he had made a mistake – saying I was anonymous on here when I'm not.
If that's childish – guilty and proud. |
| Ben Avery | 30 Oct 2013 10:46 a.m. PST |
Well, the last few posts have hardly been a ringing endorsement of the benefits or superiority of people using real names…I'm just tired of people jumping on this issue rather than addressing the points being made. If nothing else though, I've learned about the existence of Warrfarr Books and will be doing some browsing tonight. |
| The Angry Piper | 30 Oct 2013 2:01 p.m. PST |
Oh boy. I've avoided every "new editor" posting like the plague up until now. Mainly because I don't CARE, and I'm frankly baffled why so many of my fellow TMPers do. Look, not to be a jerk, but I think about any of the three "new" editors about as often as I think about Bill. In other words, not very much at all. (No offense, Bill.) I think about Bill when I renew my membership. I think about Bill when he posts something of interest to me. I think about Bill when I'm about to post something that might get me Dawghoused. I think about Bill when I'm alone and I've had one single malt scotch too many. (Kidding. Really.)That's about it. I honestly could give a rat's patoot who Bill hires, what their gender/nationality/age is, or whether or not he has ulterior motives (personally, I don't think he does, but I wouldn't give a damn if he did). I don't care about Editors Julia, Claire, or Alexa any more than I care about Editor Bill, certainly not just because they're female. Grow up, guys. Women exist. Many also need to work. Maybe the new editors don't fit the general perception of "average" wargamers (because they're not), but who CARES? They're not your pals. They're not your girlfriends. They're editors on a website that 99% of us patronize without knowing the moderators personally. If your complaint is that you can't talk miniatures with a pretty girl who edits a miniatures site, then get a life. I talk miniatures with thousands of anonymous miniatures enthusiasts on this site. Most seem to be men. That's ok with me because I'm here to talk about my hobby, and not to try to flirt or find a date with a woman who lives roughly 8500 miles away from me. Bill's a businessman and he hired some people he felt were qualified enough to entrust with his business operations. I'm a businessman too, and when I decide to hire someone I don't run them by my current employees first. (Granted, TMPers aren't Bill's employees, but the premise is the same. He doesn't need our approval to hire someone.) Bill owns the business. It's ultimately up to him who he hires and why. And who can seriously say that TMP has somehow suffered with the addition of these new staff members? Seriously??? If you feel any of the new editors acted in poor taste, that's your right. Again, I respectfully submit my opinion: who CARES? So Editor Julia showed her bare back. It's a BACK. You can see more way more skin on an episode of Game of Thrones. Or Sons of Anarchy, for that matter. Or Baywatch! (Which I've never watched, nor will I, as plastic women irk me.) In short, let this subject die. Let it die a thousand painful, horrid deaths. Let us unite once more as fellow TMPers, free from rancor and discord! As it should be! (None shall say I lack optimism!) Let's talk miniatures! |
| AlanYork | 31 Oct 2013 4:27 a.m. PST |
…in order to help fund the new Editors you hired in order to Improve TMP?Well, I tell you what. Dump the ridiculous "I somehow NEED to KNOW how many times I've been Stifled" information on our personal pages and I'll be happy to Update my account. I'm not saying get rid of Stifles, if someone wants to stifle another person here, let them do it. But we're all adults here and enough is enough with this schoolboy "Nonny, Nonny Boo-Boo, I stifled YOU-hoo" mentality that has really taken off over the last several months around here. Well said. The stifles are pointless and childish in my view and they do seem to be getting thrown around ludicrously. For example I think I recently got one for commenting about ghosts and concluding my remarks with the observation that in my personal view when it comes to the supernatural God doesn't allow us to see the full picture, science doesn't know everything and I personally choose Christ over Richard Dawkins…..OK maybe slightly stepping into religion but on the Horror Messageboard discussing ghosts is that really worth a stifle???? Not exactly "burn the heretics" is it. Are we so offended by the IMO not unreasonable views of others, no matter how politely expressed, that we have to hit the stifle button? I don't care about the stifles in themselves, it's only the internet and not really important and I'm not particularly bothered about the Horror Messageboard, I'm just using it to illustrate the point but if I'm going to spend time putting together a well thought out, relevant post only to have some "keyboard warrior" hit the stifle button, you know what, I think maybe I won't bother. TMP's loss not mine. Stifles just seem like an excuse to be petty and there's enough of that outside the hobby without bringing it here. |
Joes Shop  | 31 Oct 2013 5:23 a.m. PST |
|
| Tango India Mike | 31 Oct 2013 7:15 a.m. PST |
let this subject die. good point. |
| 15th Hussar | 01 Nov 2013 4:29 a.m. PST |
How come Andrew Preziosi crumbled? I thought it was a good idea to hold out on upgrading until the Editor gets rid of the stifle counts…Fine, but the guy said he wasn't going to upgrade to supporting membership until The Editor got rid of it, so I was wondering when/why he changed his mind? I don't know how many polls will be had on it. But there could be 200 and it would still be a terrible idea. Whirlwind et al, I didn't crumble, I went on vacation and other than reading posts during that time, I didn't post at all…I was taking a breather. Just so we're all on the same page: A) My supporting membership expires at the end of January, I will make my decision to continue/withdraw my support then. Right now, my stifle numbers have sky-rocketed, but other than one episode that brought a few stifles my way several months ago regarding a poorly written request for FREE rules, I can state that I have earned the vast majority of my stifles recently for, IMHO, two rather honorable stands I have taken: The defence of Tango01 and his numerous postings Qustioning the decision to bring three new editors on board here and the results of various comments made towards them and their own actions on this board (pictures, etc.). While I'm finished with the new Editor dust up (which I addressed elsewhere on TMP yesterday)…I'm glad to say that I would defend Tango01 and question the entire new Editor roll out all over again. If people want to stifle me for taking an honorable stand…they can knock themselves out doing it. I may not have the same strong jawline that Don Shula inherited from MG George H. Thomas, but I don't crumble. Regards, Andrew J. Preziosi…my real name. |
| Whirlwind | 01 Nov 2013 9:38 a.m. PST |
I didn't crumble, I went on vacation and other than reading posts during that time, I didn't post at all…I was taking a breather.Just so we're all on the same page: A) My supporting membership expires at the end of January, I will make my decision to continue/withdraw my support then. Right now, my stifle numbers have sky-rocketed, but other than one episode that brought a few stifles my way several months ago regarding a poorly written request for FREE rules, I can state that I have earned the vast majority of my stifles recently for, IMHO, two rather honorable stands I have taken Sorry Andrew, I hadn't realised you were a supporting member already and have decided to keep it going then work out if you are going to renew or not, i thought you must have just changed your mind – totally my misunderstanding, I'm very sorry. & of course, I very much think you are in the right about this. Regards |
John Leahy  | 01 Nov 2013 5:37 p.m. PST |
I'll be honest. I could care less about almost all of this stuff. One question is does TMP really have enough work required that it needs 4 web-masters? Perhaps the new version may be more updated and slick. News stories will be more effectively done, the search engine will finally work and so on. It's why you rarely see a News article from me. They are just too unpredictable. I use the Marketplace instead. All this seems to be pretty simple if the right commercial package is purchased (from what the IT guys I know have told me) rather than a self created one that will take months on end to work the bugs out of and fine tune. I love TMP. I'm one of the guys that have been here since the 90's and an advertiser since 2000. I think Bill has done a solid job for the most part. However, there have been times where he has made some real self inflicted wounds. Lets all hope that TMP 4.0 is wired tight and that we'll really need 4 webmasters and put all the bad stuff behind us. Thanks, John |
| Thomas Whitten | 02 Nov 2013 9:45 a.m. PST |
I've been here since the 90's as well. There has been a lot of drama between then and now. Most of it was rather ridiculous for a miniatures website (Current dust ups included.) I pretty much stuck through it and would frequent the site multiple times of day. But, with the exception of the past month, I've found myself not visiting the site as much. I think this is only my 20th post this year. I don't know if I finally grown tired of the site or if, between the slowness of the news and the spam on the message boards, I just find its usefulness gone.
As for this topic: Remove the stifle count? Sure, I'd be up for that. That wouldn't get me to rejoin though. Make it so users have more ability to tailor what information they get such as the ability to cut out spam. If that is done, I will join back up sooner rather than later. |
 Editor in Chief Bill   | 02 Nov 2013 10:27 a.m. PST |
One question is does TMP really have enough work required that it needs 4 web-masters? For the TMP 4.0 plan, I figure it takes three webmasters to 'replace' me, while I implement the necessary changes. Considering that I've been working 12-18 hour days, and they are working about 8 hours per day, and aren't as experienced yet, that seems about right. |
| AlanYork | 06 Nov 2013 8:47 a.m. PST |
As for this topic: Remove the stifle count? Sure, I'd be up for that. That wouldn't get me to rejoin though. Make it so users have more ability to tailor what information they get such as the ability to cut out spam. If that is done, I will join back up sooner rather than later. Agreed. I acquired another 4 stifles just for pointing out that in my personal view we don't need them and they can be used as an excuse to be petty whereas the hobby should be a place to have fun and escape the hassle of everyday life. So these days if you put forward a personal view in a polite manner and explain the reason for your thinking you get stifled? It makes no difference to me but once that kind of thing sets in it's a recipe for decline as more and more people see it as a site where juvenile people throw stifles at each other and simply stop visiting. Why bother posting if people are just going to stifle you? It's not worth the thought, the time or the effort. It'd be much better IMO to have green and red Like and Dislike arrows and leave the really offensive postings for the editors to deal with. |
| Editor in Chief Bill | 06 Nov 2013 3:30 p.m. PST |
Why bother posting if people are just going to stifle you? In your case, there are 25 people who don't want to hear what you say, but there are hundreds of others who haven't Stifled you. |
| Cincinnatus | 06 Nov 2013 5:51 p.m. PST |
If you show a count of how many people have stifled a user, then you should also show how many people a user has stifled. Just numbers so if it's fair to show one, then it's fair to show the other. |
| Editor in Chief Bill | 06 Nov 2013 6:00 p.m. PST |
…then you should also show how many people a user has stifled. Propose it on the TMP Poll Suggestions board, and we'll take a community vote. |
| Cincinnatus | 07 Nov 2013 3:45 p.m. PST |
I have a hunch that there are a number of people who have multiple accounts who only use their secondary ones to stifle people. A query showing account's ratio of stifled users to posts would be interesting. Why don't you run that and see if things look legit or if people are playing games with your system. |
| Silent Pool | 07 Nov 2013 4:26 p.m. PST |
A query showing account's ratio of stifled users to posts would be interesting. Why don't you run that and see if things look legit or if people are playing games with your system. Well, as my ever decreasing circle of friends around here know, I am no fan of the Stifle Table but I would defend the right given to fellow members to ignore me, should they wish. I think your question is redundant because it implies that stifling someone, and stifling someone without ever being required to give a reason, is an illegitimate act by the Stifler – clearly, under The Editor's current rules it is not. I still believe that the Stifle Table is the crux of the issue here. Get rid of it. Out of sight out of mind. (Which in part explains my present mental state).  |
| Silent Pool | 07 Nov 2013 4:35 p.m. PST |
Oh, and, apparently, it is still possible to stifle someone and still thereafter view their posts. That person has a stifle counted against them given for whatever reason or no proper reason, they don't know why, can't find out, and probably feels a bit miserable …SNIFF, your gonna set me off. Oh, and don't try that stunt with The Editor & Co., 'cause when it gets dark it gets lonely on the other side of Him. 
|
| The Angry Piper | 08 Nov 2013 7:30 a.m. PST |
In short, let this subject die. Let it die a thousand painful, horrid deaths. Let us unite once more as fellow TMPers, free from rancor and discord! As it should be! (None shall say I lack optimism!)Let's talk miniatures! I believe this post (and what came before it) has earned me 5 stifles! I am nonplussed! Nonplussed, I say! My feelings have been hurt! |
| 15th Hussar | 08 Nov 2013 8:42 a.m. PST |
If you WERE Plussed, you would have garnered 6 stifles! 
|
| John Treadaway | 10 Nov 2013 10:31 a.m. PST |
Angry Piper – I can beat that: I picked up 15 !! But I'm not non-plussed at all. John T |
| Gwydion | 10 Nov 2013 12:24 p.m. PST |
John, don't know if you can see this of course but I didn't and won't stifle you. I may disagree but I won't stifle. |
| Ben Avery | 10 Nov 2013 3:41 p.m. PST |
Never mind the stifles, order placed Gwydion. Looking forward to reading these. |
| Gwydion | 11 Nov 2013 1:58 a.m. PST |
Many thanks. Packing them now. |
| John Treadaway | 14 Nov 2013 3:22 a.m. PST |
No Gwydion – I can't see what you've… hang on: I may be bidding against myself :) John T |
| Editor in Chief Bill | 14 Nov 2013 4:31 a.m. PST |
A query showing account's ratio of stifled users to posts would be interesting. Why don't you run that and see if things look legit or if people are playing games with your system. I have, and didn't find any suspects. Oh, and, apparently, it is still possible to stifle someone and still thereafter view their posts. Well, they can unStifle you, read your post, then Stifle you again… |
| Silent Pool | 14 Nov 2013 6:32 a.m. PST |
Well, they can unStifle you, read your post, then Stifle you again… And they can hold off booking on, read all messages, then book-in and stifle to their hearts content  …oh who cares? |
| Ben Avery | 16 Nov 2013 5:02 a.m. PST |
Much appreciated Gwydion – already enjoying the 7th Armoured book. |
| Cincinnatus | 17 Nov 2013 6:41 a.m. PST |
This space – I never thought of that even though I access this site that way every day through my phone. It makes a lot more sense than my theory since it's simpler to implement and still explains the large number of people who are willing to stifle at the mere mention of the word. |
| Joes Shop | 17 Nov 2013 10:49 a.m. PST |
|
| Gwydion | 18 Nov 2013 2:25 p.m. PST |
pmh1882
Much appreciated Gwydion – already enjoying the 7th Armoured book. You're very welcome. Glad they arrived safely. Best wishes |
