"Why do YOU really want to change TMP?" Topic

It's Bill's show and he clearly does what he wants. So why do YOU want to make changes?

Can you not just ignore what you don't like and concentrate on the positive bits?

I have trouble with that.

For me, if some TMP rule is in existence describing a Board or a privacy policy as one thing then that should be upheld and not changed willy-nilly. So if you cannot have something printed because it does not have an obvious war-game link then that should apply through out TMP (currently thinking of a WoT post, but there are many other examples on ultramodern board), and the shift in privacy expectation is surely self-apparent.

Stir! Stir that pot!! 8)=

The name says it all….?

What they say … God give me the courage to change what I can and the serenity to accept the things I cannot change?

Sage advice …but rules is rules! Aren't they?

There's a difference between standing up for beliefs and being a **** disturber.

Whats all this about then?

It's technology stuff Ned – you wouldn't like it…. ;-)

Wargaming, of course. With privacy guaranteed, for sure.

Does resetting to 2010 count?
It was a hell of a lot more fun then.

It was before the OFM polls.
Allen was alive.
We actually talked about miniatures then.

That sounds about right – it just ain't what it used to be. :-(

I really don't care about most changes but I would like better search functions including one for Hobby News.

Agreed. But should we really expect any say on TMP. Should the advice to move on and ignore what upsets you be the normal?

Agree it has change for the worst but most of the websites have. Frothers and Lead Adventure Forum are not what they used to be either. Ageing of the proletariat perhaps?

In answer to the last question, yes. If your efforts to change the site have not been resolved to your satisfaction then either move on--or if you're passionate enough about it--setup your own. Pretty straightforward.

you're all doing it wrong! it must change.

"Ageing of the proletariat perhaps?"

If I'm getting older and not younger, then Boots owes me my money back on these expensive face-creams.

Does resetting to 2010 count?

No because if history repeats itself, we end up going through it all over again….

It was a hell of a lot more fun then.

In some ways yes…in some ways no….

It was before the OFM polls.

And a lot of other silly polls…

Allen was alive.

True, but I will stand up and say it, since I think a lot of folks have thought it and won't say it…"He was his own damn worst enemy at times..but he'd never admit it."
He also had some odd standards….

We actually talked about miniatures then.

We still do…if we can stop the S*** stirring and the so called "War"….let other sites do what they may….and ignore it..

It's Bill's show and he clearly does what he wants.

Seems to me like I am often asking for feedback, or taking polls to find out what the community wants.

But should we really expect any say on TMP.

Yes.

A commercial enterprise is inherently an activity in a place of public accommodation, and as such has an inherent responsibility back to the community.

Does that mean that every whining and winging must be addressed to the whiner's and winger's satisfaction? No. It does not mean that the inmates have absolute control of the nuthouse. It's far more complex an interaction that "X owns the site" or "we have rights". Grown up stuff.

An option in the Search menu to just search the topic board it is on (instead of every board in the site)would be a nice change…. ;-)

Why, what needs changing? Its a miniature wargaming site where a bunch of hobbyists come together to share and discuss experiences researching military history and playing with model soldiers. It isn't any more complex than that.

Seems to me like I am often asking for feedback

A number of us give you feedback, but my experience is that you cherrypick bits to try and refute and ignore the rest. You accuse us of whining and harassment and then DH or lock accounts. It appears that you are all for freedom of speech so long as it accords with your views.

I like TMP, which is why I visit, but I'm not so keen on the way it is run. So should I just put up with that or should I provide feedback in the hope that things might 'improve' (from my point of view)?

In the modern world isn't any business/organisation/group that doesn't respond to feedback destined to fail in the long term?

Dear Deephorse

You say "In the modern world isn't any business/organization/group that doesn't respond to feedback destined to fail in the long term?"

Yes, but what is long term?

For example, in America 75% of business DO NOT survive the death of the founder by more than 25 years. Feedback might have helped but from the standpoint of the individual entity, as opposed to a corporate entity, that may not be a meaningful statistic. But in a corporate entity the essentials or goals of the entity may not be the same as an individual entity, and the feedback will not be the same in both. Neither may be the same.

There are few Cathedral Builders any more.

But the issue of "feedback" is always problematic. Is any one specific piece of "feedback" genuine concern or merely axe-grinding? Hard to say. After years of dealing with this in a corporate environment, it's still completely unresolved. I've gone through 5 or 6 "management" and business schools on this and opinion is this. "Context, Context, Context-- It is just as important as what a person says as to how they choose to say it, and equally important what they have chosen NOT to say, and how they have chosen NOT to say it."

There is also the dimension of power. If one is in a corporate environment honest feedback may be tantamount to career suicide. Experience teaches that no matter how often someone say "you can be honest with me" there is always a hesitancy. On the personal level it is the same. If a person has only partial or limited power, feedback may be given more freely, and more or less honestly

BUT WAIT!!!

Feedback is in this way then indistinguishable from the response to any question. Doghousing in many cases then becomes a drag on honest responses. Granted personally insulting or invidious posts may deserve doghousing but when it shades into silencing of unpleasant or uncomfortable facts, then all you get is silence or fawning agreement.

Which is why most American companies don't survive the death of the founder by 25 years.

Unfortunately there is no way out of it.

Part of the problem is that we know our own souls and we do not like negative feedback, have difficulty distinguishing honest feedback from axe-grinding. While we all might like to think we are "better than most" that simply says that most are worse than us, and when we are in the position of having to give feed back, that shades our response accordingly.

I haven't figured out Bill's game in all this yet, but I'm close.

Otto

A number of us give you feedback, but my experience is that you cherrypick bits to try and refute and ignore the rest.

If you could provide examples, this discussion would be more fruitful. Otherwise, all I can say is, "No, I don't."

You accuse us of whining and harassment and then DH or lock accounts.

Harassment is a forum rule that has been around for a long time. For instance, someone was eventually forced to leave TMP because he would not stop harassing the Flames of War players.

There is also a forum rule that says, in essence, that I'll make a judgment call whether someone's whining has progressed to the level where it is bad for TMP. Some people will be unhappy with TMP no matter what, and TMP is frankly a better place if some of those people are asked to move along… that's simply a fact of community management.

Having said that, I think only a few people have ever broken those forum rules.

DH and locking accounts are the means of enforcing forum rules.

It appears that you are all for freedom of speech so long as it accords with your views.

I am for the greatest amount of "free speech" we can have in this community setting. I don't care which views are expressed, but forum rules cannot be broken.

I doubt you know which political views are mine, since I have not expressed them very often here – I'm usually a bit busy running this place!

Still waiting for the TMP, one-click, pizza ordering button here on the website, to my favorite local establishment, which has my standing order on file, and gives me a 50% discount since I'm a regular customer.

Other than that, I think I'm good.

Bill seems to be doing just fine running the site, despite anarchistic annoyances from the general public, from time to time.

War-gaming requires rules that are clearly stated and gamers and umpires abide by them. War-gaming websites must operate under the same requirement. Otherwise chaos ensues or the goodwill of the participants is lost.

Why do we have a forum for Solo Wargamers?

Well here are a couple positive change.

Have an "Age of Fighting Sail" Board covering the period 1550-1850.

Strip the Naval Boards from their periods (Ancient, Renaissance, Napoleonic, ACW, WWI, WWII and Modern) and put them under a Naval Board on the front page.

Oh wait, we asked for those. We were told we couldn't have a poll on those and Our Dear Leader was not prepared to make those changes.

Snurl1,
For the same reason they have a magazine (Lone Warrior) and several books. It is a wargaming site to which we can congregate and express and share ideas and opinions.

I totally support my dear cousin!. (smile)

Amicalement
Armand

sumerandakkad:
I didn't know they did that. I thought they were like, solo.

"So why do YOU want to make changes?"

A massive 32 replies in nearly a week.

Perhaps fewer people are actually as desperate for change as you think?

Could be that as in so many areas of life, change is driven by a very small vocal minority, while the vast majority couldn't care a less.

Or else they've seen the place go through the same meltdowns often enough to know that, to misquote Sam Cooke, a change ain't gonna come….

Plenty has changed over the years, some for the better, some for the worse, and much of it by suggestion and polling of the community.

Some people just want EXACTLY what THEY want and to hell with everyone else. And when they don't get it they raise a royal stink and cry about not getting their way.

Christot is absolutely right.

And some people just want fairness, impartiality and the rule of law (or in TMP's case the rule of The Rules).

Christot has made an assumption and is wrong. Dom has it right.

No complaints here.

I make no assumptions, just pointing out a possibility.
What I also fail to do, is rule out any other possibilities.

"Have an "Age of Fighting Sail" Board covering the period 1550-1850.

Strip the Naval Boards from their periods (Ancient, Renaissance, Napoleonic, ACW, WWI, WWII and Modern) and put them under a Naval Board on the front page."

I ust have missed the original call for this but as a through and through naval wargamer I would strongly support this should the Dear Leader (aka "Kim Jong Bill") grant us a poll on the issue – and may I not be executed by rabid dogs for daring to suggest it :) )

Stop the silly bitching and get on with the discussion, then have people stop SHOUTING when they disagree with someone's comments. I have stopped posting and reading as often as I used to simply because of 'stuff'.

I think the Editor Bill does a great job and has a great site, shame that some of the users are ………well, I will let you fill in the blanks.

Mostly I'm happy with TMP but surely we have room for dissent?

Those members amongst us who see problems or room for improvement deserve a (polite) voice here. I was opposed to the stifle/ignore tables. It took a while but the membership & Bill eventually agreed to drop them.

Silence criticism & you'll ossify the site.

The trolls who drop by from outside; well they're a different fish.

I just want people to answer the OP in a thread, and not join topics to say they don't like/know the rule set.