"Release Sup Max!" Topic

Supercilius Maximus has been doghoused for referencing the Guardian newspaper:

TMP link

The moderator is clearly not aware of British idiosyncracies.

One of them is that the Guardian is commonly known as 'The Grauniad' due to its famously laissez-faire approach to spelling:

"The paper's nickname The Grauniad (sometimes abbreviated as "Graun") originated with the satirical magazine Private Eye. This anagram played on The Guardian's early reputation for frequent typographical errors, including misspelling its own name as The Gaurdian."

link

To Doghouse SM for referring to this well-known and well-satirised affectation is bloody silly. He was not 'criticising a news source' as no news was being referenced! He was merely making a witty remark (one that would be instantly understood by most British readers) without any political baggage whatsoever.

Please release SM this instant.

"He was merely making a witty remark (one that would be instantly understood by most British readers) without any political baggage whatsoever."

Ah, and therein lies the rub. TMP isn't a British forum, and they don't get our strange foreign ways.

Anyway, just a note to our transantlantic colleagues. Yes, the Grauniad is frequently lampooned for its historic inability to spell words correctly, and I'm a fully paid up Guardioon reader.

We also often refer to the BBC as 'Aunty Beeb', is that criticising a news source too?

So Supercilius Maximus is in the dog house for piffle and Tango isn't in the dog house for the ludicrous 'What is your politics' trolling thread which has, I assume, been nuked (two days after I sent a PM to Bill which he didn't reply to and after I had already put in a complaint).

Bill I know it's your train set and I don't want to try to change your mind (which – as we've all said – is patently impossible) but would you care to at least to us the courtesy of explaining your thought processes?

Just so the peasantry understand and can, with that added knowledge, perhaps avoid infractions in the future .

John T

I missed all this so tried to follow up the post so I could make my own mind up and it's been erased from history in true Stalinist style.

If the summary by Jemima Fawr is accurate (and I'm sure it is) then this seems a ludicrous mistake. Obviously in the great scheme of things, it has no importance whatsoever but in the small world of TMP, we may as well try to be sensible and consistent (no – really) so can The Editor look at it again, accept his error and we can move on.

EDIT: And by the way, what is this NEWS SOURCE rule? I must look it up.

Doug

Indeed (both).

I can only assume that we (and anyone else replying to this thread) will now be doghoused for referencing a news source… (TWICE in your case, Martin, you bad man!)

OK – where are The Rules hidden?

Doug

so can The Editor look at it again, accept his error and we can move

Thanks Doug – it's my birthday today so I needed cheering up!

John T

"So you run and you run to catch up with the sun but it's sinking
Racing around to come up behind you again.
The sun is the same in a relative way but you're older,
Shorter of breath and one day closer to death.

Every year is getting shorter never seem to find the time.
Plans that either come to naught or half a page of scribbled lines
Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way" Time: Pink Floyd

I suddenly remembered again who Winston Smith is (I mean in the book, not John !). And then I read John Treadaway ("Tango isn't in the dog house for the ludicrous 'What is your politics' trolling thread ") and I think "Tango ? Trolling ?!! What a ridiculous thought !". Obviously east of the pond is east of the pond, and west of the pond is west of the pond, and never the twain will meet…

Read your post just now John. Happy Birthday !

I'm sure Max is taking his unjust dawghousing like a man (sobbing uncontrollably etc).

Come on moderators. He's far better out than in.

I do wish he wouldn't get it out so often, though.

Thanks Doug – it's my birthday today so I needed cheering up!

Happy birthday, John….

Obviously, if there was an irony, or perhaps more appropriately, a sarcasm emoti available, I would have attached it to that part of my post.

I think we are all in awe of Bill's almost unique ability to be right 99.9% of the time.

Doug

Thankyou, gentlemen, for the Birthday commiserations/thoughts etc

J

From the FAQ:

Can I question the reliability of a news source?
Yes, if the criticism is fact-based and not based on politics. Saying "The National Enquirer is only a tabloid." would be OK. Saying "Don't trust The New York Times, they're so left-wing" would not be OK.

So…..
If he is lampooning a well known tendency towards eccentric spelling, he should be in the clear and released.
He is NOT criticizing its politics.

I for one would favor dropping the whole "need source" rule. If political discussion is not allowed, this is just gilding the lily.

If political discussion is not allowed

from the FAQS:

Can I discuss politics here?
Recent politics are not allowed. [POLITICS RULE] Discussion of political events more than ten years in the past is allowed.

As I implied earlier, I still don't understand the, ahem… "flexibility" of the DH.

I don't really care what the rules are as long as they are clearly laid out, consistently applied and transparent in their machinations/inner workings.

So: again – I just wish Bill would explain…

From the link, I agree that this DH was a lapse in cultural understanding on the part of the Editor.

WRT Tango's "politics" thread:

Can I discuss politics here?
Recent politics are not allowed. [POLITICS RULE] Discussion of political events more than ten years in the past is allowed.

OK, what recent politcs were referenced in the thread? All I saw (granted there could have been other stuff later) was self-identifying with listed categories and discussion on how the categories were inadequate based on (yet another) cultural gap.

Noone referenced any specific political view or events (recent or not), and the OP didn't ask for any of that. No name calling of others, though there was some self-deprecating name calling of self.

All in all, one of the calmer threads on the non-wargaming related boards, and one with the highest relevance to the OP.

I just don't see the difficulty. If you can discuss something without name-calling or assuming facts that aren't and sometimes can't be demonstrated (like all these people think this, so they do that), no topic is out of bounds.

How is having a discussion that includes acknowledgement of the existence of politics without being political different than having threads on the Crusades without being religious?

Oh and happy birthday John (though I'm no gentleman).

@ etotheipi

It's very straight forward (IMHO): it's only down to the good manners of the majority of the posters here that the thread that Armand started didn't descend into unpleasantness.

Sure you can say that about any thread, but…

OK, what recent politcs were referenced in the thread?

How can a thread that asks people what a person's politics is/are (present tense) not reference recent politics? Sure, not a country or a state's politics but an individual's politics in the here and now. My recent politics. Your recent politics. What part of that is not 'recent politics'?

I'd say it all was.

The point is, however, moot as the thread's been nuked (and rightly so IMHO).

However, the issue, for me at least, is larger than that:

The whole situation with Supercilius Maximus is patently cultural misunderstanding – no one in their right mind is debating that, surely. But it shows that – lacking the grasp of subtle British nuances, Bill has applied the 'letter of the law' in DHing the gentleman, as is his right (his train set, as I've said before).

I wasn't asking particularly for Tango to be DH'd as well. I was asking how – if the 'letter of the law' is being applied with a cudgel (as I think it is) why is the same strictness not applied universally and the example I gave was Armand's now non-existent post (which I still think was as close to irrelevant trolling on a wargaming and miniature figure site as you are ever likely to get).

I believe the (nuked) Tango post and SM's comments to be capable of being compared for scrutiny.

And – if I'm wrong (which I may be: I – at least – don't consider myself infallible) I have simply asked Bill to explain his reasoning which, of course, he has – for a little while now – failed to do.

Bill is not obliged to explain himself to me – or anyone else. I just thought it would be handy.

John T

Less of a regular 'Grauniad' reader, more of 'Great Liar' or 'The Thunderer', but a regular viewer of dear 'Auntie Beeb'.
Does all this make me a serial critic of news sources??
Come on, DH me…

Good on yer, Jemima, and Happy Birthday John!

I am surprised by this since it was not an attack on the newspaper in question. The only thing I can think of is that the editor was tired and emotional at the time he made the decision.

As an Englishman and long time "Private Eye" reader I always refer to UK news papers as follows:

The Grauniad – The Guardian, whose readers are Guadianistas.

You don't need to explain to the UK readers that the Grauniad is notorious for poor spelling.

The Absurder – The Observer, the Grauniad's Sunday version.
The Idescribabalyboring -very rarely The Indy – the Independent.
The Sidy – The Sunday Independent.
The Daily Fail (less often The Daily Hate-Mail) – The Daily Mail
The Daily Torygraph – The Daily Telegraph – this is still my daily paper and I happily subscribe.
The Moron – The Daily Mirror – doubly funny when Piers "Morgan" Moron was the editor.
The Daily Getsworse – the Daily Express.
The Wapping Liar – or The Scum – is The Sun.

The point is that in the UK these terms are very common, like a lot of Private Eye expressions have slipped in popular usage.

I read the so-called offense and being DH'ed for it is ridiculous and culturally insensitive.

If anyone objects to this post I refer them to the answer in Arkell v. Pressdram (1971).

"in DHing the gentleman"

Oh he's definitely no gentleman either…

Happy Birthday, John. I don't think that violated any rules. But, if it does, I'll find out shortly, I'm sure…

Let him out. I know from personal experience that the Grauniad is rather short on editorial integrity, balance etc. I was involved in an activity where they basically published complete untruths despite having the (easily verifiable) facts pointed out to them by me and others.

And he's free!

See it does work.

And Happy birthday John

I think it should be a DH offence not to refer to the Grauniad as the errr Grauniad.

Oh yes, Happy Birthday John…..

Thankyou ladies and gentlemen for the felicitations – I've had a drive, a nice meal out with my wife and am about to eat pie (or cake: we'll see how it goes…).

I was always pleased that I had the same Birthday as ole Julius Caesar – I only wished to have his tactical nouse (though I'm pretty pleased not to have the big nose and male pattern baldness so I guess I can't complain…). Still, ruler of the Roman Empire might have been useful (if a bit of a two edged sword – pun intended…)

On more important matters, I'm glad that the common sense approach seems to have worked, re DH and Maximus.

Now if we can only read the tea leaves aright and work out the actual rules on politics, mentioning newspapers in anything other than glowing terms and visiting hours in the Dawghouse, we'll all be laughing

Maybe an emoticon for one's showing support of someone wrongly (in the poster's opinion) incarcerated might be an idea? My suggestion is a pie* with a file in it

John T

*can't think why but I seem to have pie on the brain…

He's out?

Never a good deed goes unpunished… :(

"(TWICE in your case, Martin, you bad man!)"

LOL, this has been an amusing thread, and nice to see a just outcome.

Honestly, we'll be storming the barricades next. Power to the People!

As soon as I've had a nice cup of tea anyway.

@ 138 Squadron

The Daily Fail is of course also sometimes called the Daily Heil!, in reference to their support for certain political parties in the UK and Europe during the 1930s.

A good job I didn't mention the Grauniad journalists who moonlighted as KGB assets, otherwise I'd probably have been… oh sh[DAWGHOUSED]

Now, now. You don't really want to sink the level of the Spectator do you?

……AND WITH ONE BOUND (PLUS A SAVING THROW AND A SUCCESSFUL COHESION TEST – JEMIMA COUNTING AS "REAR SUPPORT"), HE WAS FREE!!!

Thank you very much, gentlemen (I use the term in its loosest possible sense, obviously). I had no idea that either
(a) I had so many friends, or
(b) so many of you are unemployed and clearly have nothing better to do.
[DELETE AS APPLICABLE]

The Daily Fail is of course also sometimes called the Daily Heil!, in reference to their support for certain political parties in the UK and Europe during the 1930s.

I'm going to tempt fate (and possibly "do a George Davis") here by pointing out that, at the same time, a certain other UK newspaper, at that time based in Manchester, was – like most of the liberal intelligentsia of the time – an enthusiastic supporter of eugenics. Oh, the irony!

I've never knowingly supported your rear…

OK…

Would you prefer to be "general with……" instead?