"A thank you to the Editor" Topic

I just wanting to say, you have done a great job trying managing this hugh group of cranky old gamers, and it is noticed and is appreciated.

And I cannot believe that you have 69 stifles, that's just too funny.

Bill always has the last say because if you stifle an Editor your account is locked

It's the way the code is written.

Shame he messed up so spectacularly over the R Mark Davies dog-housing.

John

'Shame he messed up so spectacularly over the R Mark Davies dog-housing.'

+1 to that!

I also think that removing the Falklands thread from the 'British Wargaming' section but leaving it in the 'Modern Wargaming' section could have the impression of sending out a political message from the Editorial team!

Shame he messed up so spectacularly over the R Mark Davies dog-housing.

Is there some disagreement over the fact that RMD broke forum rules?

I also think that removing the Falklands thread from the 'British Wargaming' section but leaving it in the 'Modern Wargaming' section could have the impression of sending out a political message from the Editorial team!

Did the topic have anything to do with wargaming in Britain? In fact, it did not.

I think it is the incredible inconsistency of the application of the rules that has left so many people so confused and/or annoyed lately.

First we had the grotesque amount of bullying and harassment aimed at Tango which went largely unpunished, then the "blasphemy" nonsense, then Bandits unjustified DH'sing, amongst many other comical decisions. Now we have the Falklands thread fiasco.

Mark Davies deserves to rot in the DH for a bit, just look at the (usual) level of vitriol he displayed in his latest rants, but the other fellow was just as bad and got let off. I'm no fan of Davies by any means but even I was left scratching my head on the inconsistency of that one.

WHAT?? People in Britain don't wargame the Falkland Islands conflict then? So in "British Wargaming" we can only discuss conflicts have taken place in Britain? This has to be your most bizarre decision yet. You'd better apply it equally to all other similar boards then.

The Editor said:
'Did the topic have anything to do with wargaming in Britain? In fact, it did not.'

In fact it did! It was a group of British Wargamers, discussing the conflict and where to get the models for a conflict in a British Territory in which British forces fought! Before it was hijacked by someone else to push their political agenda! (Manufacturers mentioned were QRF (British,) MJ (British), Pendraken (British) and Timecast (British))

When this political agenda was rejected by the original posters and others the Editorial Team chose to DH one of the (British) people objecting to the pushing of the political agenda and erase a topic raised by British wargamers (presumably gaming in Britain) about British made models and figures for a British conflict from the British section!

I fail to see how that topic is less British than discussions on 'Gold Paint' and a host of other general subjects which remain there?

Drumcharry has it right.

Is there some disagreement over the fact that RMD broke forum rules?

I suspect not. But it looks like there is certainly some disagreement over italwars seemingly constant goading, needling and picking. Deliberately pushing buttons is an act of provocation in any language.

RMD broke the rules, but only about 30% as many times as ITALWARS, who is still at liberty. The only good explanations are it's down to the political views of the Editor or because ITALWARS is a supporting member.