"Just let them Froth" Topic

Telestic Warrior,

For once, we find ourselves in agreement:).

Jurgen

Flecktarn & TelesticWarrior,

So strange, the three of us are aligned on this…

Cheers,

The Bandit

Well, good-bye then….

Couldn't agree with you more TW you hit it right on the head of the nail…

For once, we find ourselves in agreement:)

So strange, the three of us are aligned on this…

I suspect that although we have divergent opinions on a lot of things we are similar in our wish for good standards of conduct, and the latest events have left us a bit concerned. I suspect Sparker felt the same way.

I suppose I could just stick to the Napoleonic boards and stay away from the TMP talk, but then I would be even more in the dark. As a supporting member I feel that…..well, to be honest, I just don't know how to feel about it.

I think TMP's greatest weakness is also its greatest strength, namely that we're all here for the discussion boards. There is little other draw but it would be hard to recreate.

Cheers,

The Bandit

TelesticWarrior, Flecktarn and Bandit, sorry to see you go just like I was with Sparker. You'll be missed.

"Thousands of copyright lawyers and many federal judges disagree with you on that one. In fact reposting copyrighted work (or links to pirated materials) without permission is a DH offense here. My master's thesis is online, but that doesn't make it public domain."

you're confusing two different concepts. there's copyrighted material and then there's privacy of information.

if i post something online about how i paint models, and someone takes that writing and publishes it then yeah i may have a copyright claim.

but if i post my method online about how i paint miniatures, now i cannot claim that my painting method is private information, and the tmp editor does not owe me any confidentiality even if i work for him, because i have already made my painting method public information.

I don't think anyone should leave TMP over something like this, but if you feel so strongly that you have to make a statement in protest, then do what you must.

However, I urge you to reconsider. We all have opposing views and disagreements. That's part of what makes life so endlessly interesting. Sure, Bill could have handled the AB situation differently but he did what he believed to be right.

Your departure will do nothing to hurt TMP. The majority of TMP members don't even follow TMP Talk, much less read these threads concerning this Frothers business. If they had, most if not all of them would agree that the vicious sexist attacks on Claire on Frothers is wrong. Yes, some of them would think Bill has overreacted in his actions responding to it, and a few like AB and Sparker would be so outraged that they resign from TMP huffing and puffing in protest. But to the vast majority of TMP's 38,000 members worldwide this isn't even a blip on their radar. TMP is a wargaming site, after all.

But leave if you 'must.' Frothers 'unite' if nothing else, right? Just don't let the door hit you on your way out.

Peace,

28mm Fanatik

It's worth noting that from my cursory observations, it's not Frothers that have forums like "needs more boobies" or any of the junk in the "wargaming spouses" forum.

They may be a bunch of foul mouthed drunks but TMP is far more of an "old boys club" at times.

Maybe I'm just used to more hippie-liberal RPG forums but that stuff is not welcoming.

If they had, most if not all of them would agree that the vicious sexist attacks on Claire on Frothers is wrong.

I would like to ask you where on Frothers the actual sexist attack were made on Claire, because there have been none made.
As Weasel eloquently put it:

it's not Frothers that have forums like "needs more boobies" or any of the junk in the "wargaming spouses" forum.

They may be a bunch of foul mouthed drunks but TMP is far more of an "old boys club" at times.

I would like to ask you where on Frothers the actual sexist attack were made on Claire, because there have been none made.

I see. So now it's "no sexist attacks were ever made on Claire on Frothers" and all the hundreds of post in these threads the past few days are about nothing?

As for the "Needs More Boobies" forum I have no opinion on it. Nor do I endorse or condemn Hasslefree or The Toughest Women of the Galaxy for selling miniatures of scantily clad and well endowed women who bear little resemblance to women in real life. I just ignore it and if it's 'sexist' then maybe you should PM Bill to suggest removing it.

I see. So now it's "no sexist attacks were ever made on Claire on Frothers" and all the hundreds of post in these threads the past few days are about nothing?

You really have no clue what has gone on have you?
I wont go into it because I don't quite fancy getting the ban hammer dropped on my head, but the information is out there.
Also please show me evidence of any "sexist attack" on Frothers, you can PM me if you like.

Bandit said

If I copied sections of your master's thesis without citation, that would be plagiarism, that is not illegal (at least in the US).

If I copied sections of your master's thesis with citation, that would also not be illegal.

If your master's thesis is copyrighted, unlikely that such applies but sure… then I would potentially be committing an illegal act depending on what I did with the information.

Bandit, you are grossly incorrect. Indeed, you are flat out wrong. Copyright is legally established when a work is created, period. It doesn't matter what the work is nor where it is, nor how it is released, posted, distributed or otherwise disseminated, nor how many people see the work or don't see the work, it's still covered by copyright law. Just because a work is released in public does NOT make the work "public domain." That's not what "public domain" means. "Public domain" is a legal term meaning that the work in question is so far removed in time from the life of its creator or his or her heirs (usually life of the creator plus 75 years) that it is no longer considered to be "owned." Being posted on the Internet makes nothing public domain. Only an agreement by the copyright holder, be that the creator or another party to whom the creator has released the rights, can release the work into public domain. (There are exceptions for works where the rights holder is unknown and undiscoverable, but I don't know the specifics behind such law). Being otherwise "in public view" has nothing to do with it. (By the way, I believe I am correct that your membership agreement with TMP includes a specific statement that posting on TMP constitutes an agreement to pass the copyright for said material to TMP.)

As for a thesis, term paper, hastily scribbled opinion, or whatever, yes, these in fact are fully protected by copyright law. Plagiarism is legally simply the breaking of copyright. Only in academia is attribution relevant. Indeed, if you quoted substantial portions of Rebelyell's thesis, with full attribution, and did so without receiving his permission, you might not be suspect for academic plagiarism, but you would still have broken copyright law. (There are certain exceptions under the "Fair Use" provision of copyright law, but that never applies to an entire work and has a long list of criteria attached that aren't relevant to your examples.)

So, whether or not quoting another blog violates privacy or not in your mind, it does potentially violate copyright law. Only if the rights holder to the posted material grants permission or specifically states that the material is public domain would you be legally permitted to post said material. The ease of cut and paste on the Internet is entirely irrelevant to the issue of copyright law.

You really have no clue what has gone on have you?
I wont go into it because I don't quite fancy getting the ban hammer dropped on my head, but the information is out there.

So what's this then?

From John The OFM's OP:

Those guys "on the other site" amount to 5 +/- 2 guys actively outraging themselves about TMP. It is in a corner of that site that you have to go and look for. It took me a while.

or this from another thread?

Addressing various "storms in a teacup" which have sprung up over on Frothers, let's next deal with…

EDITOR CLAIRE & THE DATING SERVICE

And please don't hide behind the "PM me and I'll tell you the 'true story' because I'm afraid of being banned" excuse. Enlighten us ALL, please. Do tell.

How does that equal evidence of a non-existent "sexist attack"?
Don't deflect! I'm asking YOU to provide what evidence YOU have that Frothers have perpetrated a sexist attack.

Perhaps, Mad McGobbo, you should provide us with your definition of a "sexist attack".

Why? I'm not the one who has been accusing a whole forum of it umpteen times.

Yes you should, since you are rejecting examples of sexist attacks. If your definitions do not match accepted English language definitions, you must provide us your definitions so we can be on the same page.

Yes you should, since you are rejecting examples of sexist attacks. If your definitions do not match accepted English language definitions, you must provide us your definitions so we can be on the same page.

No one has quoted an example, linked to an example, or provided a screen shot of an example of an attack on Bill or the various "editors" that I have seen, nor have they done it at Mad McGobbo's request.

I have statements quoted from other people saying there was an attack, I have not seen an attack.

Cheers,

The Bandit

Ah now I see what a straw man is -I had to look this up earlier.

Bandit has it spot on again.

You could start with the Dating Service thread and spread out from there. There is plenty in the TMP Talk board.

Rebelyell2006,

I'm not going to argue if there was or wasn't an attack, what Mad McGobbo asked for was someone to show what it was. That is reasonable.

Don't say, "go read several threads where lots of people talk about the attack," show it to us.

Does anyone have a link to the attack that started all this?

Cheers,

The Bandit

'The OFM' said he saw it in his OP, that's good enough for me. Otherwise WTH is he talking about and why did it take 210 posts before someone decided to finally say it didn't happen at all in the first place???!!!

"He turned me into a newt!"

28mm Fanatik,

'The OFM' said he saw it in his OP, that's good enough for me. Otherwise WTH is he talking about and why did it take 210 posts before someone decided to finally say it didn't happen at all in the first place???!!!

I'm not saying I doubt it, Mad McGobbo asked to see it, that seems reasonable. We're all reasonable right?

You've posted very vehement opinions about people and actions based on it, but now you indicate you haven't seen it… This is how things snowball.

Can someone show us the stupid thing?

Cheers,

The Bandit

I think some people just need to turn off the TMP Talk boards. Poof, no controversy visible unless you go seek it.

'The OFM' said he saw it in his OP, that's good enough for me. Otherwise WTH is he talking about and why did it take 210 posts before someone decided to finally say it didn't happen at all in the first place???!!!

One needs only read the Original Post to realize The OFM said nothing about a "sexist attack". Are you sure you aren't an agent of Frothers sent here to act as stupid as possible to make the rest of TMP look bad?

My brain hurts! Someone make the bad men go away!

How does that equal evidence of a non-existent "sexist attack"?

Do you think the Frothers would even have started the topic, if I had hired Editor Fred instead of Editor Julia?

Would they have obsessed over the editors if they hadn't been female? Cyberstalked them? Tried to link them to dating sites? Speculated about their sex lives? Called them prostitutes?

And what about the whole "women can't understand this hobby!" vibe from the Frothers? They don't dare to say it, but you can tell they think that women are inherently unqualified for work on TMP…

What if it turned out that Editor Fred was a very cute boy from a non-English speaking nation, hired to edit an English-language board? And then was followed by Editor Biff, Editor Rocky, and Editor Danny Steele, all with similar twink looks, all from the same country…?

I very much think eyebrows would be raised, to say the least.

Bandit et al., it started the second Bill announced that he hired Claire. As a dawghouse-watcher and occasional fan of the complaint button, I saw some nasty posted about them from posters here.

What if it turned out that Editor Fred was a very cute boy from a non-English speaking nation, hired to edit an English-language board? And then was followed by Editor Biff, Editor Rocky, and Editor Danny Steele, all with similar twink looks, all from the same country…?

I very much think eyebrows would be raised, to say the least.

I want to give you the benefit of the doubt, but there is just something fundamentally wrong with that post. It isn't even a popular culture thing, since Thailand is the country that comes to mind when people talk of that sort of thing. Are you just that upset that your boys club is infiltrated by girls? Are you capable of thinking about women without immediately thinking of sex? Or is this post a way to deflect from accusations of sexism by claiming that you are equally thinking about sex with men too?

What if it turned out that Editor Fred was a very cute boy from a non-English speaking nation, hired to edit an English-language board? And then was followed by Editor Biff, Editor Rocky, and Editor Danny Steele, all with similar twink looks, all from the same country…?

I very much think eyebrows would be raised, to say the least.

Why don't we stick with the facts, rather than some crazy hypothetical?

Rebel, Rebel, you've torn your dress! – David Bowie

Er… wot?

I am confused here, Rebelyell.

First of all, what does Thailand have to do with anything and what is "that sort of thing" that people supposedly associate Thailand with?

My point was that I am sure someone on Frothers would have made comments if TMP started hiring attractive foreign boys as editors – and only attractive foreign boys from the same country, in the same age bracket, with the same looks.

Now, Thailand doesn't spring to mind when the word "twink" comes up. Look it up and I am sure you'll agree.

So what exactly is "that sort of thing" that you are referring to, that Thailand is supposedly so famous for?

Actually, I am very happy that TMP has women members. This site could do with some more. But seriously: any place with a "needs more boobies" page really isn't going to attract too many non-salary-receiving women. A site like that, in my opinion, isn't taking the obvious steps necessary to make itself less of a "boys club".

In fact, I heard that a bunch of women once got dawghoused once precisely for objecting to the "boobies" page, btw. I guess they just didn't like birds or something.

So I really don't think your gripe is with me, here. Talk to The Editor.

As for what I think about, I admit to having a bifilthy mind. If I saw someone hiring cute only young thangs who all looked alike and who weren't particularly noteworthy otherwise, I would go "nudge, nudge, wink, wink" and grin, irregardless of their gender or orientation.

However, I certainly wouldn't get offended about it, like Lord Ragland did (presuming consenting adults and all). And you seem to think it was Ragland who was being the sexist, so…?

Editor, I am sorry, but it wasn't me who brought up the hypothetical. Rebelyell is the one to talk to about that.

I am confused here, Rebelyell.

No you're not. You are muddying the waters. Of course the use of "twink" is really telling, as that term has little use beyond gay subculture and truck-stop male prostitution. You are saying you would perpetuate the Frother myths and hatred regardless of who Bill hires.

Interesting that you associate the "gay culture" with "truck stop prostitution", Rebel. Most LGBT people would find that incredibly offensive.

Twink is just a slang term meaning "cute young guy". Basically the male version of "chick". And while it may have started in gay culture, here in New York city, many, many heterosexual women use it too, to describe cute young guys.

Also, you started out by saying the Frother myth was sexism. So how would nudging and winking at a twink editorial corps be propagating that myth?

Also, I very much doubt anyone would be nudging or winking if TMP employed a bunch of grandmas or even employed your average diverse bunch of people.

It is when everyone looks young and beautiful and exactly the same that people start the nudging and winking, not because they are women.

That is my point.

Finally, I couldn't care less if TMP hires twinks, cute girls or bissexual albino dwarves. I don't find it problematic in the least. But I don't think people nudging and winking about something like this are necessarily sexist.

Most LGBT people would find that incredibly offensive.

Twink is just a slang term meaning "cute young guy".

If I saw someone hiring cute only young thangs who all looked alike and who weren't particularly noteworthy otherwise

I don't even need to create my own responses. You provide the humor yourself.

I'm glad that you are amused and that I can have this opportunity to expand your vocabulary. :)

Oh, one more thing. Thank you for linking us to that Lord Raglan thread. I hadn't read that before.

Do you really think Raglan's objections were sexist?

Why?

So everyone fighting this on either side have actually gone and read the posts on that other forum that everyone is fighting over, right?

We're not just getting mad because other people are mad, right?

I mean, it seems to me, reading Lord Raglan's objections that he thought the young editors were being "groomed" (whatever that means) by dirty old men. He wasn't objecting to their being women. The whole thread, in fact, seems to be about whether or not the editrixes are being subject to sexual harassment.

Sounds pretty feminist to me, actually.

Where do you see the sexism in all that?

Do you really think Raglan's objections were sexist?

Well, for starters there is the assumption that women are incapable of informed consent, and thus would be too vulnerable for teleworking. Next, the assumption that Asian women work online because they are prostitutes destined to be smuggled to America and they are not capable of just being online employees.

Sounds pretty feminist to me, actually.

Umm… no.

It is when everyone looks young and beautiful and exactly the same…

I'm not sure why "young" keeps coming up with regard to the editors. Is it because they're Asian? Because 28 and 29 just don't seem that young to me…

Beautiful? Frothers doesn't agree…

"Exactly the same" – Really? You can't tell them apart?

Frankly, Weasel, I haven't read anything at Frothers yet. Why, do you think I should? Does anyone have a link?

I'm presuming that they are claiming that The Editor is somehow abusing his editorial staff, correct?

Editor, are you sure it is OK with the editrixes that you are revealing their ages? Many women do not like that at all and this is supposedly all about privacy, after all.

But I said "young" because they look young. That is what the people react to. I certainly didn't know their ages until you told us.

I likewise said "beautiful" because they look beautiful. I presume you aren't going to tell us that they are secretly very ugly? ;)

Whoah, Rebelyell… Where do you get the idea that Lord Raglan thought Asian women are prostitutes being smuggled into America?

I mean, I can see the bit about about him thinking they have no agency, OK (although whether that is do to their being women, young, or Foreign or some combination of all or some of those things isn't clear to me).

But prostitutes? Where does he say that in the thread?

I am reacting to style and fashion when I say "exactly the same", Editor. But I have to admit that I can't tell them apart. Then again, I can't tell most white American girls apart when they all go for the same look, either. Or most white American boys, for that matter. I'd be absolutely at sea in your average fraternity house, I'm afraid.

Do the people on Frothers say they are ugly? That would be surprising to me.