| Patrick R | 03 Jun 2015 3:21 a.m. PST |
I've seen moderation go all over the place. |
| Oh Bugger | 03 Jun 2015 3:46 a.m. PST |
Inconsistent and arbitrary. Feckless even at times. |
| Aubrey | 03 Jun 2015 5:16 a.m. PST |
Inconsistent is the word that springs to my mind.
Personally I'm all in favour of a light touch on moderation BUT there is a need for appropriate rules and consistent application. As for this recent issue with the Troll emoticon. That sums up the current malaise as far as I'm concerned. How can it be not ok to use a word but ok to use a symbol that means exactly the same thing? |
| Zardoz | 03 Jun 2015 5:19 a.m. PST |
Heavily inconsistent, especially to 'lefties'. |
| jpattern2 | 03 Jun 2015 5:36 a.m. PST |
Inconsistent, much harder on lefties than righties.
And get rid of the troll icon. It's one thing when it's used in jest, but a certain party is using it in place of the word, and that should be against the rules.
Unless we get an arseclown icon with which to respond, as alien BLOODY HELL surfer kinda-sorta suggests.  |
| MarescialloDiCampo | 03 Jun 2015 5:40 a.m. PST |
It's actually quite amusing… |
| 15th Hussar | 03 Jun 2015 6:13 a.m. PST |
ZippyFuseNet, Manley and Ethanjt21 have it right. Along with the statement below from Abwehrschlacht Arbitrary, inconsistent, shows favouritism, sexism and right-wing leaning tendencies. All of which I hate. Do I expect the Owner/Moderator changing (or at least seriously contemplating and considering his actions during the past few years…)? NOPE, not one iota.  And there is an argument in regards to this "question" being used for baiting and trolling purposes in and of itself. |
 Endless Grubs  | 03 Jun 2015 6:37 a.m. PST |
What he said. Add "Liveleak for Gamers" as a TMP subtitle--lots of utterly pointless news dross that has nothing to do with gaming. |
| Toronto48 | 03 Jun 2015 6:58 a.m. PST |
|
| MH Dee | 03 Jun 2015 7:30 a.m. PST |
Inconsistent, biased towards the right. If I'm honest, I didn't even really notice before the Ultramoderns board, and then that Holocaust denialism issue. |
| RavenscraftCybernetics | 03 Jun 2015 8:10 a.m. PST |
|
| Jakar Nilson | 03 Jun 2015 8:11 a.m. PST |
|
| Irish Marine | 03 Jun 2015 8:30 a.m. PST |
I've said before I'll say it again. We should be able to write about whatever we want, discuss what we want and fight about it. The problem is not enough adults read and discuss the posts because they get butt hurt and make things suck for everyone else. If you don't like what you are reading stop reading! |
| Winston Smith | 03 Jun 2015 9:20 a.m. PST |
Irish Marine, there are plenty of forums out there where you CAN do that. Frothers, for one. That's pretty much a rockem sockem free for all kind of place. And some stamp collector and model railroad forums too.
But you seem to be one of those who wants ALL forums to follow your ideal. The same kind that wants TMP to have a Like feature and all that nonsense.
We do not have to be a place where we can shoot people we don't like in the streets and then holler at the people who object to having to step over the bodies. |
| Tommy20 | 03 Jun 2015 10:55 a.m. PST |
The moderation seems completely arbitrary to me. |
 Editor in Chief Bill   | 03 Jun 2015 11:24 a.m. PST |
Bill, can we still call people an arseclown? Yes, arseclown is an allowed word. |
| darthfozzywig | 03 Jun 2015 12:22 p.m. PST |
As to the left-right thing, I got DH'ed for mentioning that someone deleting their privately hosted emails might make it difficult for the Freedom of Information Act to help write an accurate history of a military operation that occurred a few years ago. That was somehow interpreted as an attack on the left, I suppose, so it happens at random intervals. I'll add that this was actually in response to The Editor's post of an article that accused the White House and current administration from deliberately lying about the UBL assassination, which hardly gets any more political than that. |
| Irish Marine | 03 Jun 2015 12:51 p.m. PST |
Winston Smith, again if you don't like don't post or read it. |
| Weasel | 03 Jun 2015 1:07 p.m. PST |
I propose that every time someone complains about their "free speech", Bill bans a random, unrelated forum member :-) |
| Editor in Chief Bill | 03 Jun 2015 1:12 p.m. PST |
…which hardly gets any more political than that… Except that it was about a military operation, right? And one that will often be wargamed over the years. |
| chubby | 03 Jun 2015 1:13 p.m. PST |
Dawghouse for any non related miniature posting |
| Russell120120 | 03 Jun 2015 7:13 p.m. PST |
I have no idea as I ignore the political posting, and do my best to avoid the over abundance of Tango posts. The Editor in Chief comes across as overly defensive from the standpoint of an outsider. I can still find some interesting historical information, or even "fun" information (zombies, etc.), but it seems to be getting swamped under by combined Tango-deluge and Frother snark-fest. I have been a supporting member, even though the "benefits" didn't seem all that great. But I am taking a wait and see position for now before returning. |
| Kevin C | 03 Jun 2015 8:26 p.m. PST |
The rules are clear and reasonable for a site dedicated to the miniature hobby. I think that some people want to push the envelope a little too far and are upset when the editor enforces the rules as posted. Real politics is best practiced in person at public forums and not subtly on a site that is dedicated to a hobby where many people seek a few movements of relaxation from the their hectic lives. If one wants to make an impact politically, then that person should become active in political forums and other appropriate political outlets. But the editor of this site has stated clearly that this is a site dedicated to the miniature hobby, and is not a political forum. That is one of the reasons that I am a supporting member. It is nice to have a place where those of us interested in the same hobby can come and share information concerning this hobby and not be distracted by other matters. And by the way, I am a politician, and I for one am glad that there is a place where I can go and take a break from politics for a few moments each day. Kevin |
| OSchmidt | 04 Jun 2015 5:48 a.m. PST |
Dear Bill You know, if you REALLY wanted to make effective moderating you'd eliminate invidious threads that have nothing to do with war games and dawghousee people who post them. That nips the thing in the bud. |
| Kevin C | 04 Jun 2015 6:17 a.m. PST |
Thanks kyoteblue I will check it out. By the way, I think your nephew was one of my former students and I introduced him to the miniature hobby. Kevin |
| dapeters | 04 Jun 2015 9:54 a.m. PST |
Abwehrschlacht has it right as does Otto |
| The Gray Ghost | 04 Jun 2015 11:59 a.m. PST |
This
Arbitrary, inconsistent, shows favouritism, sexism and right-wing leaning tendencies. All of which I hate and this You know, if you REALLY wanted to make effective moderating you'd eliminate invidious threads that have nothing to do with war games and dawghousee people who post them. That nips the thing in the bud.
|
| 138SquadronRAF | 04 Jun 2015 12:33 p.m. PST |
I'm a Lefty and I agree 100% with John the OFM/ Winston Smith…even if that gets me thrown in the Dawg House. Agreed. And I rarely agree with the OFM. BTW I write as a longstanding English Tory. Arbitrary, inconsistent, shows favouritism, sexism and right-wing leaning tendencies. All of which I hate. Also agreed. |
| Stosstruppen | 04 Jun 2015 12:36 p.m. PST |
What Zippy and Otto said…. |
| Goonfighter | 04 Jun 2015 1:52 p.m. PST |
As a longstanding non Tory, I agree with 138SquadronRAF. |
| Winston Smith | 04 Jun 2015 2:58 p.m. PST |
There are two ways you can moderate.
Irish Marine seems to favor none at all. Correct me if I am wrong on this. He wants no holds barred Rock 'em Sock 'em etc. On any and all boards. Obviously that's not for everyone and it would drive people away. May I suggest Frothers if that is what you want. But if you want a moderated polite site, you can only have one rule. That's Weaton's Law: Don't be a  . Don't set up elaborate rules with exceptions and expansions. Simply punish ALL bad behavior. Do not punish one side of an argument and have a private chat with the other. Funny how the other is usually the instigator and usually in agreement with the Editor's views. If a spat breaks out and you feel there should be a timeout, DH both. Do not let one side off. It takes two to tango (sorry Armand! 8:)) so two should go to DH. If you are honest about this discussion, take all the advice to heart. |
| Winston Smith | 04 Jun 2015 3:09 p.m. PST |
Tim is absolutely right. There should not have been a poll on Holocaust denial. That is so obviously beyond the pale that to have a poll is ridiculous. I did vote to ban such but only because I felt I had to.
It should have been an obvious ban and if you were to nuke and ban, few would have objected. Remember the guy who was asking (trolling) about modeling crematoria? I remember his topic hung around for an indecent amount of time. That was not denial, that was vicious trolling. A rational moderator would have nuked the topic and banned the perp. Toot sweet. Yet you hemmed and hawed. Why do you feel the need to get a consensus or permission to nuke blatantly offensive threads?
I am not talking about dissing Robert E Lee or Alexander the Thug. I am talking about turning Syria into a radioactive puddle of slowly cooling molten radioactive glass.
If you have to ask what is patently offensive or make up rules, may I recommend the words of Justice Stewart: "I know it when I see it." Just exercise your well known arbitrary and capricious rulings for the forces of Good! |
| Winston Smith | 04 Jun 2015 3:15 p.m. PST |
By the way, everybody who is posting here is operating under the assumption that you actually WANT honesty and will suffer no retaliation.
I hope that's the case. |
| Weasel | 04 Jun 2015 3:18 p.m. PST |
I just want it to be on the record that I disagree with Winston about everything. Except this. :) Whether the rules are largely non-existent or plentiful, just enforce things equally, regardless of whether the person is a favoured poster or not. |
| The Gray Ghost | 04 Jun 2015 5:53 p.m. PST |
Having just taken a look at the mess that is the Ultramodern board I would say there is no moderation on this forum |
| Editor in Chief Bill | 04 Jun 2015 7:15 p.m. PST |
The rules are ridiculous. I don't understand how it is not possible to just moderate without them. The "attacking news sources" rules is just so eye blinking ridiculous. It's so obvious why this was in place – see my impression on Bill being political above. It came into being to protect a favourite US news source of the editor that many people continually slagged as being so very obviously aligned with a US political party. So much so that the news source is even ridiculed here in Canada. "Attacking news sources" makes absolutely no sense whatsoever and is completely random. It's neither ridiculous nor random. The fact is that once someone slags a new source as biased, it leads to a flamewar. Always. That's why the rule was put into place. Doesn't matter if the source is MSNBC or NYT or Daily Mail or Fox. Seeking a poll on whether Holocaust denial should be a dog house offence. That was beyond belief. Bill, that one really put me in mind of an alien coming to earth and not understanding anything about the land he was now ruling. We have different opinions on the subject. I prefer to let bad ideas be defeated by discussion, not by censorship. The community overruled me on this one. So be it. |
| Editor in Chief Bill | 04 Jun 2015 7:16 p.m. PST |
Having just taken a look at the mess that is the Ultramodern board I would say there is no moderation on this forum Then get busy and hit the Complaint Button, because nobody else is… |
| Abwehrschlacht | 05 Jun 2015 12:06 a.m. PST |
The fact is that once someone slags a new[s] source as biased, it leads to a flamewar. Always. That's why the rule was put into place. Doesn't matter if the source is MSNBC or NYT or Daily Mail or Fox. That reads to me as 'don't engage in critical thinking.' |
| Aubrey | 05 Jun 2015 2:34 a.m. PST |
Seeking a poll on whether Holocaust denial should be a dog house offence. That was beyond belief. Bill, that one really put me in mind of an alien coming to earth and not understanding anything about the land he was now ruling. We have different opinions on the subject. I prefer to let bad ideas be defeated by discussion, not by censorship. The community overruled me on this one. So be it. Bad idea? Varnishing before your paint job has dried is a bad idea. Eating cheese before you go to bed is supposedly a bad idea. Denying the Holocaust is a lot more than a bad idea. There is a lot of talk about The Editor's forum means the Editor's Rules. I agree with that. But with it also comes responsibilities. As for the comment about not wanting censorship that implies we can talk about absolutely anything. Really ? I come here to get my fix on toy soldiers. That's what this site should be about. Anyway I've said my piece. |
| Starfury Rider | 05 Jun 2015 7:29 a.m. PST |
I was glad I wasn't eating when I clicked on this thread, especially so when I saw that Bill (if I may) had actually started it, otherwise I'd still be getting food off the monitor screen. So, before offering a response, I'll turn to my trusty old dictionary for a definition of Moderation, which gives as examples - act of moderating
state of being moderated or moderate
freedom from excess
self-restraint And when applied to a Moderator - one who moderates or restrains And for Moderate - to keep within measure or bounds
to reduce in intensity
to make temperate or reasonable
to decide as an arbiter In answer to the question 'Rate TMP Forum moderation', I can only answer; try actually moderating and I'll give you an answer. People, more than a handful, have been voicing their concerns over this for a prolonged period of time now. Nothing has changed. Then this post pops, asking in effect, 'everything all right folks?', as though no one has queried the situation before. Bill, I don't think you really appreciate just how badly the situation regarding Holocaust denial, revisionism, whatever badge you want to stick on it, was actually handled. It was like watching a beat cop in turn watching an obvious crime in progress and just standing there, observing events. Then when asked by concerned citizens whether he was going to intervene, being told, 'I want to make sure it's an ACTUAL crime first, unless I get a complaint from an interested party, not just you rubberneckers'. The way that situation was handled did change my opinion of this site, and to be brutally honest by extension, you. Expecting a poorly defined 'miniatures militia' to ride in and clean house rather than have the editorial staff intervene, so as to let the right argument triumph through natural debate was just plain WRONG. This is either a hobby discussion website or a 'social media exchange allowing all comers to speak on what they want, without fear or prejudice, just like FB or Twitter, but with toy soldiers thrown in too!' 'PS, we'll add rules as the fires occur, so be careful and keep up to date with the T&Cs, cause they change a lot with all that fire fighting!' This is the only website I know that has an official Arch Enemy, and is locked in a state of War Eternal with it (the Swedish melodic death metal crowd will get that one). But this is pointless isn't it, you could get a petition a literal mile long and it won't change a damn thing. Gary Kennedy |
| Weasel | 05 Jun 2015 7:45 a.m. PST |
War Eternal is a mighty fine album :) |
| tkdguy | 05 Jun 2015 11:00 a.m. PST |
Moderating is a thankless job. I was a moderator for a couple of forums years ago, and trying to keep order could prove to be difficult. And those discussion boards were minuscule compared to TMP. Give the Editors a bit of slack. Their job isn't easy. |
| Ethanjt21 | 05 Jun 2015 9:07 p.m. PST |
But this is pointless isn't it, you could get a petition a literal mile long and it won't change a damn thing. Much Truth |
| Editor in Chief Bill | 05 Jun 2015 10:12 p.m. PST |
…the problem with having all these rules on TMP is that there are so many… Really? TMP link |
| Aubrey | 06 Jun 2015 3:44 a.m. PST |
Give the Editors a bit of slack. Their job isn't easy. tkdguy. To be fair the Editor posed the question himself. Now unless he was looking to have his ego massaged, what he was after was honest opinions so that he could see where there were areas for improvement. Having said that. Yes I'm sure its not an easy job and all credit to the Editor for having the guts to ask the question. |
| Alfred Adler does the Hobby | 06 Jun 2015 4:19 a.m. PST |
Wow!
Seven toons in the Dawghause…
Hey Did I make it there while I was out during the week? …D'oh! Nope, I only got deleted – phew! LOL |
| Valator | 06 Jun 2015 7:34 a.m. PST |
The Editor and this whole Frothers thing… the Monty has a harem stuff… has him unhinged. We've reached the point where we're apparently supposed to take sides in this nonsense, and The Editor is out for blood on the forum membership. Screw this. I'm out of here. Thanks for the decade+. |
| Editor in Chief Bill | 06 Jun 2015 11:43 a.m. PST |
The Editor and this whole Frothers thing… the Monty has a harem stuff… has him unhinged. We've reached the point where we're apparently supposed to take sides in this nonsense, and The Editor is out for blood on the forum membership. Sorry to lose you. I can assure you, my hinges are just fine. |
| Robert Kennedy | 06 Jun 2015 3:09 p.m. PST |
Hmmmm….Never seen Valator before this. Oh well. |
| Martin From Canada | 07 Jun 2015 2:25 a.m. PST |
When people say they have no politics, it means that their politics aligns with the status quo. None of us are unbiased, none removed from the question of power. We are social creatures who absorb the outlook and opinions of those with whom we associate, and unconsciously echo them. Objectivity is impossible. […]
—George Monbiot
link I know I've sailed close to the wind on a few topics, but I have noticed the disproportionate treatment on science boards when the side that's unconstrained by facts and peer review are given more latitude to comment than their opponents. Granted there may be more diplomatic ways to tell somebody they or their source is mistaken or unable to do simple algebra, but it does get repetitive after some time and frustration leaks out. I know I've had to drastically edit my post after I've submitted it in order to excise the snark more than once… |
