skippy0001 | 06 Jun 2015 12:31 p.m. PST |
I propose a vote for moving the Ultramodern board to the Blue Fezz since it generates more political discussion than hobby discussion. Seems a simple enough solution. |
Tango01 | 06 Jun 2015 1:09 p.m. PST |
You have to ask for a poll my friend. Of course, my vote goes for the NO!. Why don't removed the Napoleon Discussion too in those old fighting days?. Not so old now that I remember (smile). Even NSFW was nasty in some time. The problem are not the forums. The problem is some people who don't follow the rules or come here to snipe fellow members. That's simple. Just my two cents. Amicalement Armand |
Coyotepunc and Hatshepsuut | 06 Jun 2015 1:43 p.m. PST |
I think Ultramodern could be much more user friendly if we just don't feed the trolls. If someone doesn't want to be involved in a political discussion, no one is holding a gun to their head saying "get involved!" When I see discussions, Ultramodern or otherwise, that are not my thing (whether for politics or sculptors who have never even seen a picture of a naked woman) I always ALWAYS have the option to disregard it and move on. If there is a serial offender I don't like reading, there is always Stifle and Ignore. |
Mute Bystander | 06 Jun 2015 1:49 p.m. PST |
Edit: Responding to Tango1, not punkrabbit… Hey, I type slowly. Um, yes and no. Yes, it is mostly the people. But DH'ing hardly impacts anyone enough to stop such behavior if it is chronic. I think Bill would have to ban multiple people to stop the noise to signal ratio from being unbalanced. And the howls for that would be deafening. And realize that no matter how Bill rules there are people who will want Bill to be "fair" – whatever the hell that means – and when he doesn't follow their ideas of "fair" they will bitch/moan/complain/whine because they never grew up and think the world is all about them. This isn't LAF (thank God) and this isn't some other forum. This is TMP, warts and all. I have come to grudingly accept it will never be perfect. Come for the information, ignore the s, and understand TMP is like any other place on the virtual or physical globe – flawed but generally good. What was the line from Lilo and Stitch? This is my family. I found it, all on my own. Is little, and broken, but still good. Ya. Still good. |
Cyrus the Great | 06 Jun 2015 2:01 p.m. PST |
|
Winston Smith | 06 Jun 2015 2:02 p.m. PST |
Slap down and punish ALL bad behavior. Don't punish one and talk to the other privately. Don't let some jerk provoke arguments and then get away with it because he is on the " correct " side. |
Joes Shop | 06 Jun 2015 2:03 p.m. PST |
|
Rod I Robertson | 06 Jun 2015 2:37 p.m. PST |
No. The Ultramodern Board is a very useful resource and should be kept. However the jingoism and extraneous politics should be tamped down and the misbehavior and tantrums should be sanctioned with progressively longer stays in the DH (perhaps stretching out for months in the hardest cases for serial re-offenders) until people clean up their acts. Cheers and good gaming. Rod Robertson. |
Dynaman8789 | 06 Jun 2015 2:51 p.m. PST |
I wouldn't know either way, turned off that rats nest of a board months ago. |
Mako11 | 06 Jun 2015 2:51 p.m. PST |
No. If you don't like, or don't want to read a topic, don't click on it. Warfare is an extension of politics in many cases, so it is very hard to have discussions of one without the other, especially if there is to be any context at all for the conflicts. |
Ambush Alley Games | 06 Jun 2015 3:43 p.m. PST |
Nope. I suggest following the steps below (which I frequently fail to follow myself, so no judgment is intended in the suggestion): 1. If you don't want to see a board, turn it off. 2. If you must see a board, don't read posts by folks you know are going to tick you off. 3. If you do read a post from someone that ticks you off, don't respond to them. 4. If you do respond to someone that ticks you off, why did you do that? To me, it seems much easier to police one's own behavior than to try to police everyone else's – although, as I admitted at the get-go, I frequently fail at that. I try not to blame anyone else when I do, though (sometimes I fail at that, too). Just my opinion, of course. Shawn. |
Weasel | 06 Jun 2015 3:57 p.m. PST |
I've been informed several times that it's impossible to discuss 15mm miniatures or dice mechanics without discussing the politics in the middle East so unfortunately it'll have to stay :-) Think of it as a containment zone. |
dragon6 | 06 Jun 2015 4:44 p.m. PST |
As "punkrabbitt returns" so sagely advised If there is a serial offender I don't like reading, there is always Stifle and Ignore. Problem solved. Bill gave us the power to ignore those we don't want to read. Use it |
skippy0001 | 06 Jun 2015 4:46 p.m. PST |
Thank you for responding. If it isn't moved then maybe this would tone things down a bit. Right, Tango, I am know asking for a poll. |
15mm and 28mm Fanatik | 06 Jun 2015 6:37 p.m. PST |
It's a non-issue since most people stay away from the Ultramodern board anyway. Only the same "usual suspects" frequent it in case you haven't noticed. |
Tgunner | 06 Jun 2015 6:50 p.m. PST |
|
Slappy | 06 Jun 2015 8:42 p.m. PST |
Having one for politics is a good idea? I mean war is merely an extension of politics, trying to split the two is like splitting a hair. Leave it as is and moderate obviously non-wargaming posts. |
Patrick Sexton | 06 Jun 2015 10:14 p.m. PST |
|
Tango01 | 06 Jun 2015 10:32 p.m. PST |
My good friend Kyoteblue… you said: "It should read. That or two UM boards one for politics and one for gaming." Maybe you are right… but for example see the thread I have posted about "gaming" and compare it with others of Ultramodern.. TMP link Ever you didn't take note of those new modern soldiers!. (smile). Amicalement Armand |
Bangorstu | 07 Jun 2015 4:59 a.m. PST |
How do you discuss modern warfare without reference to politics? |
Gwydion | 07 Jun 2015 5:16 a.m. PST |
Bangorstu – easy, you talk about the battle like you do with WWII or the Crimea or Napoleonic or the Wars of the Roses. Not many people on wargames fora discuss the rights and wrongs of the Yorkist/Lancastrian claims to the throne, the reasons behind the wars in Europe at the turn of the eighteenth/nineteenth century, the decline of the Turkish and rise of the Russian Empire, a little more about the underlying causes of WWII but not much. People discuss weaponry, tactics, grand tactics, some strategy and how to turn those into tabletop games (there are many other types but this forum is about gaming with miniatures). It is, however deeply unsatisfying in the context of contemporary warfare NOT to discuss the reasons behind that warfare because it often feels like we are directly involved. We could do it but most people don't seem to want to. You can't have a discussion about wargaming asymmetric warfare effectively without building in some sort of feedback loop between actions on the battlefield and public opinion/morale and political will to fight. You CAN do that in a mechanistic manner that cuts the cord between how a thing works and whether it should work like that, but it seems almost impossible for most people to do this. We bring our morality with us (and probably a good thing too – but it makes for charged discussions when someone want to kill everyone that may be a threat and another person wants to say hang on that way madness lies.) So it can be done – but does anyone want to? |
Bangorstu | 07 Jun 2015 5:55 a.m. PST |
Maybe… but a lot of the discussion here is about what MIGHT happen, and that involves politics. I suspect if I looked, there's a lot of political discussion on the other board,s but were think about it as'history' – as in why did X do Y? e.g. Why did Hitler invade the Soviet Union? If he was going to do so, why not ask the famously anti-Soviet Poles for help rather than subjugate them? That is politics… |
Gwydion | 07 Jun 2015 7:28 a.m. PST |
Yes- but the 10 year rule allows it – you get the odd person who takes this area too far – hence my comment that WWII suffers more from this than Roman Civil War games Asking 'why X is invading Y?' now is something I would ban on political grounds within the 10 years rule on the UM board. Asking 'given that X is invading Y' now 'how would you wargame a US intervention?' Might be okay. Unless the main argument was whether it was X invading or Y provoking, in which case off we go again. It depends on that intent. A better way of asking that question would be 'How could you game the US supporting Y in their current conflict with X?' but people are using the UM board to peddle a political position. It can be done without politics as I said – but some people want to make it a propaganda board not a gaming questions board. |
RavenscraftCybernetics | 07 Jun 2015 8:33 a.m. PST |
if you dont like the board… dont go there. |
Inkpaduta | 07 Jun 2015 11:54 a.m. PST |
No. Although sometimes someone steps over the line, I find it many interesting and useful topics here. |
Mako11 | 08 Jun 2015 6:47 a.m. PST |
Seems to me there is a major, coordinated "jihad" of late, against the Ultramodern board. |
Silent Pool | 08 Jun 2015 7:53 a.m. PST |
I don't think the Ultramodern board fits in with what TMP is supposed to be about. I don't like it. I come here as an escape and to avoid the sensational news headlines. But I do know what I can do about it, and let those who do enjoy it do so in peace. |
Visceral Impact Studios | 08 Jun 2015 6:51 p.m. PST |
There is a very simple test that can answer this question. If you completely ignore the fact that the Ultra Modern board appears on a web site called the Miniatures Page and only read its content then what sort of site would you conclude that you're looking at? There's only one answer: Tango's Military News Aggregator Blog. It essentially functions like sites such as The Huffington Post and the Drudge Report. It attaches headlines to news articles written by other poeple about current military affairs and then TMP readers comment primarily (and almost exclusively) about the aggregated content and not about miniature wargaming at all. Tango's own contribution is usually limited to the link and the occassional "glad you enjoyed it (smile)". One solution I had suggested to Bill: give Tango his own board and let him link to other sites which generate the original thoughts/information/content. That way TMP members seeking tabletop game content about moderns can read the moderns board and those seeking news created by military affairs writers can easily find Tango's link effort. |
Mako11 | 08 Jun 2015 7:22 p.m. PST |
That solution has been voted on, IIRC, and turned down, VIS. |
David in Coffs | 08 Jun 2015 7:35 p.m. PST |
Would such a site be called "Tango with Tango"? I like the information posts Usually don't read the politics |
Tango01 | 08 Jun 2015 9:36 p.m. PST |
This is comming to smell bad… Again with "Tango" or "John" own forums?. Aside from the ridiculousness of that request … this began to sound to a return to the not so distant dark days of persecution … this begins to be outlined clearly in a disguised form of showing AGAIN those personal attacks we all know … I hope I'm wrong. But Mako 11 also have a point. Amicalement Armand |
Tango01 | 08 Jun 2015 10:46 p.m. PST |
Not agree my good friend and I'm sorry for that. Take note that the "Ultramodern" was born because when the "actual-military-news" modern threads began to grow up there, Bill have to create another forum for that purpose. Now, few month latter, Bill have to open another forum because … same cause.(?). I have tried to post Modern figures but there are very few as you have note. And be sincere here my friend… any of those threads have the same amount of interest that the "actual-modern-military-news"! A few days ago I have to point you some new soldiers I have posted in Talk!!(smile) Imho Modern Board is the place you and others who don't want to read/see about "actual-modern-military-news" have to go. All the new vehicles-soldiers-terrain modern news are there!. No matter if they belongs from 1982 or 2015!. So, this "campaing" or "jihad"(quoting Mako11) with so many theads (by the same person with a support of a few more) have no sense. If you don't want to see/read about "actual-modern-military-news" you have to avoid Ultramodern and concentrate your interest in the Modern Forum. As you have said in the near past my good friend… you love the lost causes… and in this case as in your Frothers Quest … there would be not any advance and sadly there are some people who take advantage to snipe… again!. Amicalement Armand |
Visceral Impact Studios | 09 Jun 2015 3:33 a.m. PST |
If you don't want to see/read about "actual-modern-military-news" you have to avoid Ultramodern and concentrate your interest in the Modern Forum. This goes to the heart of my test proposed above. Think about it. Tango just proposed that, if you don't want to read about current military affairs on the Ultra Modern board on the Miniatures Page website then avoid the ultra modern board. That's backwards and precisely to my point above. If you want to read PRIMARILY about current military affairs then the solution SHOULD be to go to a military affairs web site, NOT a website about tabletop gaming using miniature soldiers. More importantly it also reveals how he perceives the ultra modern board: NOT as a board about tabletop gaming but a board about current military affairs. And that's how he treats it and what it has become. Again, ignore the name of the website, look only at the content, and one would conclude that you're on Tango's Military News Aggregator Blog. But Tango, it's important that you don't take a passive aggressive stance and accuse other members wanting to read about tabletop ultramodern gaming on TMP of waging a personal jihad against you. You just admitted that you see the Ultra Modern board as being dedicated to your military affairs links and that fellow TMPers seeking ultra modern tabletop gaming news should slag off to the modern board. I don't think that's appropriate. You've taken it upon yourself to join a website dedicated to tabletop gaming with miniature soldiers and then proceeded to ignore that focus of the site by spamming numerous links to current military affairs sites with NO attempt to add value or tabletop related commentary. And now you've admitted that you believe TMPers seeking ultra modern tabletop gaming news are not welcome to seek such news on the ultra modern board. There is no personal jihad against you as an individual. I have noted in other threads that the content that you link to does have value to tabletop gamers. The difference is that, as I propose in the thought experiment above, all you do is spam links to military news sites without adding any value or tabletop gaming context. You should not be surprised if those seeking ultra modern tabletop gaming information on a tabletop gaming site might be annoyed that you have chosen to make the ultra modern tabletop gaming board your personal military news link aggregation site. Another solution would be for Tango to not merely spam links and to instead make an effort to provide tabletop gaming contexf for his links. And not just a fig leaf with a throw away line or two. Tango could make an effort to explore a tabletop gaming topic that is supported by his links and make the focus the tabletop gaming question. It's the link spamming completely out of the tabletop gaming context that people find annoying. @Mako…thank you for that clarification about the past poll, was not really aware of that. But in light of Tango's comment that he views the Ultra Modern board as not intended for tabletop gaming information maybe it's time to revisit that solution. Give Tango his Current Military Affairs link aggregation blog/board and let him spam links there. And leave the ultra modern board dedicated to ultra modern tabletop gaming. |
Visceral Impact Studios | 09 Jun 2015 4:49 a.m. PST |
While discussing this just now with my kids they had an interesting point: link spamming is considered so pernicious that most forums have rules against it, even if the links are somehow related to a forum's content. They want users contributing to the discussion and not just spamming HTML links. And many forums use tools such as Captcha to prevent link spamming by bots. Just now I noticed that last night 5 links were spammed to the forum with no tabletop gaming context. Just spammed links to news sites. |
Weasel | 09 Jun 2015 8:46 a.m. PST |
We do have an UM news board. UM was created when people were getting mad about Tango's posting stuff. |
Visceral Impact Studios | 09 Jun 2015 10:17 a.m. PST |
Weasal, I'm probably ignorant of the history of the UM board. The way it appears is that it's just one sub-set of the overall modern period (post 2005 IIRC). If it was created in response to news link spamming then maybe it should just be renamed "UM News" and then the other modern board can be renamed to handle tabletop moderns up to the present. Tango gets to spam links and others can focus on tabletop miniature gaming. Besides, the current UM board is going to have to get udated every year as it stands now. In 2016 does each modern board advance one year? Or does UM get renamed to include the current year? Renaming UM to UM News is the easiest solution. |
Patrick Sexton | 09 Jun 2015 10:46 a.m. PST |
What is funny is that I have had no problem enjoying TMP since before 2002 (I misplaced my original membership in '02 :)) and the only events that have caused me any level of 'distress' are the ones calling for a 'banning this' or 'segregating that'. I really am puzzled why bothersome posts aren't ignored by the people that are bothered by them. And if someone still manages to get around your defensive screens, then just stifle them. |
Tango01 | 09 Jun 2015 11:35 a.m. PST |
Spam?… seriously?. That's the concept you have I post on TMP?. "Another solution would be for Tango to not merely spam links and to instead make an effort to provide tabletop gaming contexf for his links. And not just a fig leaf with a throw away line or two. Tango could make an effort to explore a tabletop gaming topic that is supported by his links and make the focus the tabletop gaming question. It's the link spamming completely out of the tabletop gaming context that people find annoying." a)You have not the right to said what I have to post or not in the forum. b)You have not to accuse me or confirm that my threads are Spam. c)How many people you consider find my post "annoying"? You … and other three guys maybe? Sir, your concepts and concluciones are completely disrespectful to me. I do not accepted them, nor you campaing against my performance in tmp either. I beg you to reconsider your words and I ask for an apology. Amicalement Armand |
Tango01 | 09 Jun 2015 2:58 p.m. PST |
Thanks my good friend!. (smile) Amicalement Armand |
Tango01 | 09 Jun 2015 3:55 p.m. PST |
Best of luck my friend!. Amicalement Armand |
Visceral Impact Studios | 09 Jun 2015 7:50 p.m. PST |
Tango, I don't believe that I've been disrespectful. In fact, I recognize the potential value of the content you contribute and recommended that you be given a dedicated board of your own. But by dominating a forum that's supposed to be focused on tabletop miniature wargames with links to news sites you're undermining TMP's value to its readers interested specifically in miniature games and advertisers. The reason why your links consitute forum spam is that you make no effort to provide context relevant to TMP's target audience: miniature wargamers. You just link random news sites without adding value. You're doing manually what bots do automatically and you're also doing something which is prohibited on many forums (i.e. link spamming without supporting the forum's focus). Whether or not you and I agree is irrelevent. The market will take care of this over time. As the UM readership shifts from modern tabletop gamers to those primarily interested in news and politics advertising will become less effective. As ads become less effective advertisers will dwindle (or maybe shift to those hawking politcal stuff…maybe that would make the Google ad engine useful on TMP's UM board.) I think you're getting a bit hot under the collar and taking personal offense where none is intended. In fact, while you're clearly now treating this as a personal issue I believe it is you who have failed to respect the fact that, by your own admission, you're treating the UM board as your personal property, TMPers who disagree with your span should slag off, and Bill's business interests don't matter. At the end of the day ask yourself this: have your contributions enhanced TMP's reputation as a source for UM tabletop gaming content or have your actions aliented readers and advertsiers, regardless of your personal feelings or desires on the matter? Honestly, you could still do what you do on your own blog or maybe a TMP board dedicated to links to news sites. The fact that you see this as a very personal turf battle of some kind is telling. For that reason I'll have nothing else to say on the matter. It's just too unpleasa t and unproductive for everyone involved. |
Tango01 | 09 Jun 2015 9:28 p.m. PST |
"…you're treating the UM board as your personal property TMPers who disagree with your span should slag off, and Bill's business interests don't matter." So, this is not a clear personal acusation?. I'm the owner of the board because I post mostly of the threads?. How about Napoleon Media?. Why you don't complain on that?. And again with the spam. You sustain that for what I ask you apologies. Do you consider that Bill is fool?. If you had taken the time to read some of the Ultramodern theads you would take note that Bill is another contributing of the new threads.!. Everything you have point here is "unplesasa and unproductive" with no other agenda that said I need my own board (a very old "battle cry" of Tango Haters). So, at the end, your campaing leads to nowhere and see how the Ultramodern continue growing every day. You still own me an apology. Armand |
Visceral Impact Studios | 10 Jun 2015 4:39 a.m. PST |
Tango, Here's my final comment on the matter and I hope it does a good job explaining why your actions have been so disruptive. A guy walks into a sports pub where everyone is watching football (aka soccer) and discussing the players, the games, the tactics, and techniques. Then the guy starts screaming about FIFA corruption, the politics of Blatter, and whether or not the world cup should be held in Qatar because of the way they treat construction works which leads to discussion of worker rights and racism. Then he starts yelling about the obvious sexism of women playing on aritifical turf. Very quickly he drowns out those who had come to watch football and discuss players, matches, tactics, and techniques. Soon the vast majority of those who came to discuss football players, tactics, and techniques give up and leave. The discussion shifts entirely to the politics, corruption, racism, and sexism related to (and in many cases not related) soccer. And the worst part is that the fellow who came into the sports pub screaming about politics, corruption, racism, and sexism wasn't trying to demonstrate how these issues might drive football tactics and techniques and matches. And none of his thoughts were original, he was just screaming the thoughts of others. And when a few hardy souls pointed out that the sports pub was now nearly empty and there was no discussion of the players, the matches, the tactics, and techniques, the screaming fellow acted like the wounded party and started demanding apologies from those who suggested he stop screaming about FIFA politics, corruption, racsim, and sexism and return to the favorite topics of the sports pub (it's a sports pub after all). It was such a nice sports pub. And the poor screaming fellow has no feeling of responsibility for killing the discussio of players, matches, tactics, and techniques with all of his incessant screaming. |
Tango01 | 10 Jun 2015 10:45 a.m. PST |
Your comment is very interesting and well related… but not real about how I contribute with TMP. You still own me an apology and you know why. See you in Ultramodern but in other threads. Amicalement Armand |
Slappy | 10 Jun 2015 4:21 p.m. PST |
ok wow – That put into words (Visceral Impact Studios) my fear on the Tango posts. To be fair its not just the UM board. |
floating white bear | 11 Jun 2015 2:45 p.m. PST |
+1 VIS. Good try. I am one of the three. I think there is far too much non-wargaming content here. Oh look Maytag has a new washing machine. Apparently wargame related because soldiers might wash. (Wargamers occasionally too!) Regards, Rob. |