"Sam Mustafa Leaving TMP" Topic

I expect that he would be quite welcome on other fora…

Re. stifling.

I have only been a member a couple of months, post fairly infrequently, don't think I have ever posted anything controversial, and can't remember ever being in an 'argument' on here… and yet I am amazed to see that I have 23 stifles.

Can that be right?

Can I suggest two slight modifications to the stifling system:

a) You should be able to see who has stifled you

b) When you stifle someone, you should have to give an explanation why (and the person you have stifled should get to see this too).

I am at a loss to understand how I can have offended 23 people (almost 1 every 2 days!) during my short flirtation with this forum, and genuinely would like to know who I have upset, and what I did / said. This way, if an apology is in order, I will happily offer one to the offended party (or, indeed, all 23 if I think it justified).

@Otto,

My only question on this is why was the link to one of my threads given than to McLaddie's The link given, if you read it, it fully states my own position and disagreements with Sam (so that my remarks may be taken in context, and then goes on to say quite a few nice things about him and his games which ARE true, even though I may not like them, and which was written in support of Sam against his detractors, and in support of a post he had written. I really in the post was defending Sam against others.

I just linked to that page of that thread because that was the page where Sam said he was going.

Regards

I have only been a member a couple of months, post fairly infrequently, don't think I have ever posted anything controversial, and can't remember ever being in an 'argument' on here… and yet I am amazed to see that I have 23 stifles.

And 22 Ignores. Personally, I wouldn't worry about it. I picked up five more Ignores since I last logged in. Guess some people just don't like Naps or Zulus. :)

Are the ignores in addition to the stifles? I foolishly thought that if I had been stifled, I had always been ignored?

What is the difference?

I'm even more confused now!

Confusion reigns here, it is inherent in the system….

Imperium, don't hijack the thread. It makes it even more confusing….

Read the FAQ.

As you command.

Sergeant Paper,

You reason incorrectly, TW. The stiflee might indeed be deconstructing the stifler's posts, but that isn't at all visible to the stifler, that is, they WON't find it out at all, unless they unstifle the poster that they stifled.

That is only true if I believe in the concept that ignorance is bliss, which I do not.
The stifler may indeed be unaware that his arguments have been taken apart, but everybody else will know it, and besides, the stifler will never learn or grow from the process.
And if we don't learn from our experiences then there is probably no point in having them.

Dear Whirlwind

Ok thanks

I understand.

Otto

That is only true if I believe in the concept that ignorance is bliss, which I do not.
The stifler may indeed be unaware that his arguments have been taken apart, but everybody else will know it,

So you just can't stand to know somebody is talking about you or picking apart your arguments without you knowing it?

I do not understand that feeling myself, because when somebody is a jerk, I really do not care what they say anymore myself. If they have irked me so much I have to restrain myself from posting anything because I would be breaking the TMP rules (which is what the Stifle is for, in my opinion), I am DONE with them. Life is too short to worry about jerks.

and besides, the stifler will never learn or grow from the process.
And if we don't learn from our experiences then there is probably no point in having them.

I don't need to learn or grow from anonymous jerks on the web. And I don't come to TMP to learn from the experience of fighting with jerk posters. If that means I miss some amazing pearl of wisdom from an otherwise useless waste of time poster, I am okay with that. This is hobby learning, not critical lifesaving information.

I'm not stifling people because I don't want to learn life lessons. I'm stifling them because I've learned a life lesson – some people aren't worth listening to…

To paraphrase Sergeant Paper, not all songs are about you, whoever you happens to be and sometimes it is wise to choose for a song not to be about you.

Cheers,

The Bandit

Or Carly Simon Bandit?

Or Carly Simon Bandit?

Indeed, indeed.

Cheers,

The Bandit

Life goes on….

Meh.

Personally I couldn't care less who stifles or ignores me – there are a lot of them out there so I wouldn't have time to keep up for one thing!

And not that I've ever stifled or ignored anyone, but I really wouldn't want to have to explain my reasons for so doing either – time to talk about toy soldiers is precious you know!

Just to demonstrate that sometimes the moons align, I'd agree with Sparker on this one:

And not that I've ever stifled or ignored anyone, but I really wouldn't want to have to explain my reasons for so doing either – time to talk about toy soldiers is precious you know!

If someone has to give a reason that means that someone else will either be required to or be enabled to make a judgment and that spins into a vicious circle.

Cheers,

The Bandit

a) You should be able to see who has stifled you

b) When you stifle someone, you should have to give an explanation why (and the person you have stifled should get to see this too).

No, and no.
Stifling affects absolutely no one in any way whatsoever.
YOU ARE NOT HARMED.
If I stifle you, I owe you no explanation at all. If I stifle you, it merely means that I have chosen to not see what you have posted. The statistics are meaningless.

Thanks for posting that link Whirlwind, it's very late and I have had a bit of insomnia recently.

Reading that pompous pseudo analytical claptrap has settled me nicely for a decent kip tonight. In fact I have almost dropped off already.

Nighty night all.

John. I think some won't want to acknowledge that. It seems easier to keep trying to make it appear to be a bad thing that is "harming" and "Punishing" themselves or somebody else in some way or form.I believe that some of those who have been ignored or Stifled are to so because of their opinion on this beaten to the death subject both Pro and Con.

Sergeant Paper,

I wasn't talking about stifling the jerks and trolls, I was talking about stifling people that are up for constructive rebuttal and debating honestly. I have no problem in stifling the first group, but if we stifle the second group just because we can't stand to be challenged or corrected, then it is a complete act of intellectual cowardice. (Such a person is unlikely to learn from ANY of his life experiences, let alone his TMP ones).
Don't tell me that the latter motive isn't often on display here on TMP. I have seen it happen many times, and I believe that it is the main motive behind the vast majority of stifles. The true jerks are the ones who turn to the stifle for, well, just about anything, because they are offended by just about everything. Hopeless cases that they are.
I can't for the life of me see why anybody would want to stifle Bill McLaddie. I don't read his long posts and I find some of them boring, but he has a great knowledge of Napoleonic tactics and in general he is a great contributer to TMP, in my opinion.

Stifling people for Trolling is totally acceptable but probably quite rare, because Trolls are actually quite rare here (personally I don't even stifle the trolls as I find that they get a ban from the site very quickly anyway, so there's often no need).
And the jerks don't offend me. I like to read views that oppose mine, even if they are dumb or demented ones. People don't stop existing just because you can press a button on them. But if you want to stifle them then I can completely understand why you would.

P.S. Maybe it wasn't clear from what I wrote, but i don't care one jot who stifles me either. Never have, never will. My point is that the ACT of stifling is itself
i) counter-productive in most cases (and it probably would not have worked in the specific Sam/Bill case, for the reasons explained above), and
ii) the act of serial stifling because they are offended by literally everything is interesting to people who are interested in studing human peculiarities/foibles.

Sam's departure from TMP is indicative of the main problem on TMP which day by day I see "stifling" and "ignore" only exacerbates and which are the symptoms of a deeper problem. I say this not because I wish "stifling" and "ignoring" to be removed.

It's a lack of civility and petulance that is astounding in this, a silly hobby played by grown men, "and getting very heated about it too" as H.G. Wells noted in the inception of war-games.

Sam MAY be thinned skinned, I am NOT saying he is, but I suspect he is also tired of people trashing his best efforts and constantly nay-saying him and his efforts. No one likes a consistently adverse cacophony, especially from those who do nothing.

But that is all beside the point.

I am amazed that people cannot get along in this hobby and simply take an adverse opinion at face value and agree to disagree. No one's lives are at stake, no one's firstborn is going to be sacrificed, no one is going to be beaten within an inch of their life.

I believe that I read in Bill's note that Sam has withdrawn both his membership and advertisement from TMP. If the latter is true it is far more serious than mere stifling and ignoring. It means that he has become so disgusted with trying to publish rules that he may be getting out of the business. That would be sad, even though I don't like his rules and games) but many others do very much. But it is sad because it has been a very important part of his life and trashing that is a hard blow to anyone. No one drops their advertising if he wants to remain in business.

I'm sorry the nay-sayers got him so down.

I am sorry to see Sam go for a variety of reasons, from worthy opponent to those areas we agreed. It was amazing to watch how a simple poll question went south, deeply south, to the point that Sam decided to leave.

What 'drove Sam away' was my response to another poster, not Sam's comments. I reacted to the question because 1. my comments are continually seen as criticisms of his rule sets, when I have made two critical comments about his various game rules in the past ten years, one on the Grande Armee list ages ago and one on TMP about four[?] months ago over what a specific card in Longstreet did for the gamer. As Sam has said, the gamer didn't have to use that card…

The other is that disagreeing with Sam over game and simulation design issues marks one as a nay-sayer… In the past six months at least, each and every time we have disagreed on a thread, I was there first and he chimed in later as he did on the last thread, so he did have difficulties ignoring me.

He has persistently argued on TMP that simulations aren't possible and I have disagreed. He has repeatedly challenged me on that account. I have responded as specifically as I could to each. I have never seen that disagreement as a reason for either of us to leave TMP. Sam has.

And that is too bad.

Actually, and I know I am commenting on one, but all these endless threads about stifles and ignores probably do more damamge to TMP as a 'community' than whatever prompts people to stifle and ignore.

Now, if I were King for a Day, I would instantly blat all threads started with the word 'stifle' or 'ignore' in the subject line.

Not Good. I'm very disappointed that it came to this.

Not Good. I'm very disappointed that it came to this.

I'm not clear on what the "it" was that came to this but that Sam was frustrated others did not chance their views in light of his.

There is one person who is responsible for Sam leaving TMP and that is Sam. He wasn't chased off by name calling or personal insults, no on followed him from thread to thread telling him that his games were bad or that his mechanics were poor.

Sam chose to participate in discussions of wargaming mechanics and design philosophies with people who held different opinions than he did, that his participation frustrated him is a shame and that such frustration drove him to leave is similarly a shame.

In the end we're all out, including Sam. As Bill says – Sam was a worthy opponent for those with contrary views and that, if nothing else, made him a valuable part of the community. An important thing when it comes to learning through discussion is having intelligent people to disagree with. If the reason Sam left, as he stated in his last post, was such disagreements then it would seem Sam doesn't value such, at least not here, I hope he is able to find it somewhere else or find his way back.

But make no mistake, this was Sam's choice. If you want to blame someone or be mad at someone, the only valid target is Sam. Frankly, I don't think anyone should blame Sam, but I also don't think blaming anyone else makes any sense at all.

Cheers,

The Bandit

I think TMP is the poorer for Sam leaving. He has contributed a lot to the hobby and that gain is now lost to -at least- TMP.

I am always (unpleasantly) surprised by the seeming ease with which a lot op TMP members react negatively to other people's opinions. It is almost as if they feel obligated to do so.

I recently wrote a blog about the things we lost when a certain influential company chose the Way Of The Shareholder and published links to that blog on various fora and FB pages. It generated a lot of response, mostly of recognition and the same sadness that I felt when writing the blog.

Everywhere except on TMP, where responders immediately started to question the fact whether the company had been influential at all (which wasn't at all what the blog was about). The difference is striking.

I agree with some of the writers above that this is connected with the lack of moderation on TMP. The Editor explicitly does not see it as his responsibility (has even stated that it is impossible while there are many examples to the contrary) and acts in exactly the same way so it is basically a free for all as long as you don't violate any of the -rather randomly enforced- Forum Rules. Stifling and Ignoring are crude tools that are supposed to mitigate this. But this is just like teaching your kids that telling people to shut up is what it means to solve one's differences in a mature way.

You can't even discuss this for the risk of being accused of being over-sensitive (Leave if you don't like it, "Bill's Place, Bill's Rules" is held like a banner before you, like that is an argument…). Appealing to good form and debating skills seems to be seen as a weakness here.

TMP is a fine forum. But it could be great. The fact that it drives away people like Sam proves that it still isn't.

Two very good posts from Bandit and Pijlie.

"It's a lack of civility and petulance that is astounding in this, a silly hobby played by grown men,…"

Like this….

"Nice but most of you don't have a clue as to what you are talking about."

TMP link

I am glad I missed all of this frankly, but now that I have found it I will say something. I have been a tmp member twice before, and like many I am loathe to post here about anything I am creating or publishing. I started a game company some years back and every comment I received here confirmed that no one wanted to support my efforts to infuse new ideas, but even more sadly they themselves didn't lift a finger to create on their own. Just keep everything churning but don't make ice cream…There are too many ready to rip up anything in the name of raising their own comb and crowing triumphant when they hurt the person or the product. There are two points that might be considered by members if they were inclined to see the hobby grow:

1. Positive comments, or criticisms expressed in a positive way, generate a sense of inclusiveness that this hobby needs to grow. Regardless of how much you disagree, it isn't the job of posters to smash someone's work in front of others. It the work fails, then it will fail on its own. Ripping into anything shows only your ass and drives people away. Bottom line, no one cares how right you are. People come here to engage the hobby as fully as possible.

2. Cooperation makes for better products. Rather than using the word "but" use the word "and" when developing your argument. Trivia isn't important outside of threads devoted to it. The number of buttons on a sleeve, for example, means nothing to most of us. If this is your passion, great, start your own threads about it. Don't launch into someone's paint job because they have too many buttons. By changing your sentence structure to be cooperative, you not only appear smarter but friendly. Taking the example above, "nice work, and I can't believe how well you got those buttons painted on the sleeves." Bottom line:get over yourself and help others succeed.

I always realize that I'm playing the same sort of game that I played when I was 7 years old lining up my army soldiers. During my life, I have had to make many decisions that effected people's lives in significant ways, those were important things that I still live with and wonder about. This is just for fun. Any time, I start to get riled up, I step back and remember that I'm playing with toys. Or remember that the other guy is also just playing with toys.

This thread, and the original linked to it, must be the worst dribble I've read on TMP. But its not the first. I come here for information, look at other folks games and figures, and to see what's new. Too often I run into some pontificating garbage. I found I couldn't spare the time to complete either thread.

Don't know Sam. Never played one of his games. But I couldn't blame him for not wanting to participate in this junk.

Amen, brother.

I don't know Sam. I have never seen nor played any of his rules. In fact I have only seen any of his posts or threads rarely.It is truly sad that someone has to "take all their toys and leave" as they say. But LIKE any subject here there are two sides and never will the twain meet on it and that is for sure. From what I understand from reading what others have said the odds are he will probably come back. Just give him some time to relax and look at the situation himself and come to the conclusion as to what he wants to do. Its all up to him and only him. Not you.

I recently tipped my hat at others ability to argue – but that other thread contained the scariest comment I've read in a long time.

If I understood Mexican Jack Squint correctly – this is the same game design argument – with the same protagonists – that was begun in the last few issues of the post-Hal MWAN.

But….that was so long ago….can they really, truly, still be arguing the same points ?

Sadly I'll never know (unless someone chooses to tell me) as now as then I lose the will to live when picking through this minutiae of game design theory.

Its "The Duellists" replayed for real on the tmp boards

Kevin,

But….that was so long ago….can they really, truly, still be arguing the same points ?

Don't we all? I mean, your positions on core notions haven't really fundamentally changed over the years, I suspect few people's had, if they did… they wouldn't be core beliefs…

Cheers,

The Bandit

Choice exists here to a large extent

One has the choice to be part of TMP or not.

That choice is entirely self-determined.

Sam left?

Man, that sucks. And I never got an answer on post-modernism in his rules. But I understand. Too much sophistry on here from certain quarters. I'm glad to see that some other people have picked up on it though.

This website just took a major hit, as far as I'm concerned.

This website just took a major hit, as far as I'm concerned.

What do you suggest should be done?

Should designers be shielded from their critics?

Was the critic too strident? If so, why didn't anyone request a moderator to intervene on the grounds of harassment?

Sam had the tools to avoid his nemesis, but chose not to use them.

So Sam has left TMP?
Well simply put, that sucks.

It's not the first time… which means I won't be surprised if he comes back.

Hi Bill,

Honestly, I thought about adding (after posting of course…) to my comment that I wouldn't want to see TMP more heavily moderated than it is. I like that this website is a free, basically open forum (as opposed to the opinion above about how the old war game magazines were somehow better because they were heavily edited… well ok, that's an opinion, haha). The general policies of the website aren't to blame at all, nor would I want to change them.

Anyways, it'd be nice if he headed back over. I guess we'll see.

Perhaps we need a "special rules" forum where game designers can interact with gamers without worrying about undue criticism? Perhaps a "Game Design College" where different designers get their own boards, and designers have the power to expel people from "their" board?

I mean, your positions on core notions haven't really fundamentally changed over the years

Depends on what you call core…I've changed my opinion over the years on many things. It's not just me – I now see societial norms that are the complete reverse of what were in place in my youth (and I say thank goodness we've decided racism, homophobia, etc aren't ok after all).

But anyway – structures of Game Design as a core value? To quote John McEnroe "You cannot be serious!"

Bandit: core notions

Kevin: But anyway – structures of Game Design as a core value? To quote John McEnroe "You cannot be serious!"

In the contexts pertaining to TMP, not pertaining to your personal life.

Cheers,

The Bandit

Kevin ?

"Perhaps we need a "special rules" forum where game designers can interact with gamers without worrying about undue criticism? "

So long as there is no cross-posting to the other boards. That would make a confusing situation worse.

It does however seem that the topic causing this brouhaha was not related to a specific game or designer.

A designer would need to the willpower to not get involved in such topics in the first place, design boards or no.

Bob

20thmaine,

Sorry, read you name too fast and misread it as one of Kevin Kiley's. My bad.

Cheers,

The Bandit