"What is Happening on TMP?" Topic

In a thread on TMP Talk, several members have asked for clarification about what Bill's new rules allow to be posted and what cannot be posted. According to Bill companies who do not advertise here are too cheap to be considered proper traders and their products should not be promoted in any way.

Of course this creates issues. For example, several Games Workshop products have their own boards and they do not advertise here. The same applies to games and rule sets from other companies.

In the interest of fairness and allowing for the fact that Bill has a history of deleting posts and members whenever he deems it appropriate and without public explanation, I think it is critical to ask the very simple question; "What can we post and what can we not post?"

One member posted this morning the following message about his requests to Bill for clarification.

"All I ever asked was that he would just inform members about this new policy, rather than just delete new postings that do not conform to the changes that most are totally unaware of.

But I have this morning agreed with him to stop complaining and am now doing so. This is a service I very much value. It is his creation. It is his to manage, as he sees fit.

I have never been hostile to him about a "New Policy" that I did say might actually be an advantage to us (even if unrealistic in practice). I just begged him to communicate. He, politely, asked me to stop complaining in a personal message this morning."

Frankly, I think it is unacceptable that new rules have been introduced and members seeking clarification are simply told to "stop complaining" when all they want is clarification of the new rules.

Following up on that, I received an email from a friend this morning who has been approached by Bill. In this Bill states the following:

"As you probably know, our website is funded both by paid advertising and by paid memberships. What you might not realize is that your paid memberships allow us to maintain balance, so that we are not unduly subject to the influence of powerful game companies.

Just this month, a rules publisher (I won't mention the name) demanded that we remove a member's review of their ruleset. We told them we couldn't do that, but that the company was welcome to respond in our forum and rebut the negative review. They chose not to post on our forum, but instead angrily condemned TMP for being full of negativity!

As you and I know, TMP provides a vital role in our hobby by allowing our readers to voice their opinions – positive or negative! – without being censored by commercial interests."

A blind person would be able to see that this was a reference to TooFatLardies. However, this is sadly a gross misrepresentation of the facts.

At no point did I demand anything. At no point was I angry. At no point did I ask Bill to remove any comments about our rules or products. I DID ask Bill to consider in general terms the negative way in which some posts were made. It is very different to say "What do you hate about a product" and saying "what are the strengths and weaknesses of a product". I expressed the opinion that I found there to be a small but significant level of negativity on TMP that made it difficult for me to see it as a positive shop window for the hobby and one where I could suggest to a youngster joining the hobby. his was not a demand, this was a suggestion and a suggestion which related to only a small number but highly visible amount of posts.

I suggested to Bill that minor changes to the rules could avoid the more vitriolic types of post. He disagreed and elected to post selected sections of my private communication with him on the public forum. This resulted in precisely the type of negative name calling and low level abuse that I was flagging up to Bill. Sadly he could not see my point. Indeed, he started several spin-off threads seeking to garner support for his position.

Now, I find that my suggestions are being used as a rather negative recruiting call to gamers to save TMP from a mythical, murky, fat-cat figure behind the hobby who is seeking to stifle debate and discussion. Nothing could be further from the truth.

As an advertiser who supported TMP for over ten years I feel very sad that Bill seems unable to present a coherent policy to his members. The mantra "Bill's place, Bill's rules" does not give carte blanche for any business to ignore their customers. As a result, I would ask Bill to please clarify the situation regarding the new rules for posting with regards advertising and non-advertising companies and what individual members can say about them. Secondly. I would ask Bill to stop misrepresenting what I discussed with him and to stop making statements about my behaviour that could be construed as libellous. I take the latter very seriously indeed.

Richard
TooFatLardies

Richard,
I am very sorry to find that there is discord between you and Bill. I very much appreciate all that both TFL and TMP has done for the hobby over the years.

I agree with you that there is a difference between constructive criticism and abusive commentary. We would all be well reminded that this is a fairly small community. Those that pour much effort and time into designing and developing the components that make what we do possible do so as a labor of love. I implore my fellow gamers to keep that in mind when offering up your opinions.

Mike

Best question ever!…..

Amicalement
Armand

It is indeed an excellent question.

And no doubt soon to be deleted, like. Lot of posts seem to be these days.

I must admit I am lost, as a lot of my interest is in seeing new 1/72 product – who don't advertise here. So I am find8 g more and more that my time is spent browsing FB.

TMP used to be my go to site, and I still enjoy it. But this latest approach seems odd to say the least

A blind person would be able to see that this was a reference to TooFatLardies.

It is not a reference to TooFatLardies. It is another publisher.

Well, one publisher was angry. But how this is tied with new policy? Publisher was angry against another publisher? So now any publisher cant't talk on Forums.. because of this?

Well, one publisher was angry. But how this is tied with new policy? Publisher was angry against another publisher? So now any publisher cant't talk on Forums.. because of this?

I'd really like to know what prompted this since the original post seemed to have come from a troll with nothing to back it up and that somehow resulted in a draconian policy and stifling any criticism.

Well, one publisher was angry. But how this is tied with new policy?

It's not. Two separate things.

I'd really like to know what prompted this since the original post seemed to have come from a troll with nothing to back it up and that somehow resulted in a draconian policy and stifling any criticism.

You'd have to ask whoever wrote that. However, the new policy is hardly draconian… we're just asking that commercial interests pay their own way. It's not fair to TMP or to our advertisers to let 'freeloaders' have full use of our forums. And yes, it also means that we're asking our members not to give 'free advertising' to non-advertisers. I think this is a common sense policy.

And to repeat myself, this applies to commercial announcements, such as new product releases, sales, and convention appearances.

Can we talk freely about new products from paid advertisers and discuss their sales and convention appearances?

Not being able to talk about new rules and figures will limit much of what we discuss here

What about Kickstarters? That makes the entire kickstarter board almost irrelevant if you can't mention them?

Toofat, I have no intention of entering into this discussion in public. If you received PM's I'd say a few things.

So all this new policy was because of me? ;-)
I talked about and showed my sculpts too much?

Bill I totally agree with you on not wanting non-advertising companies to announce new products or sales or what have you on the forums. When I saw those sort of posts in the past it always seemed rather on the tacky side.

However, not allowing us, the forum members towards whom the advertisements are directed in the first place, to freely discuss all things miniature is much more unfair than any slight the advertisers may have felt. After all, people come here to talk about minis and if they canīt do that freely without having to worry about whether a company is a paid up advertiser or not then surely they will go to another site, such as the one suggested by Buck before you deleted it.

If you want to remove posts by non-paying companies, I think thatīs quite logical, but please leave TMP members out of it. I think most people just want to talk about the hobby and not have to refer to a list of advertisers to do so.

Finally Bill, like many here, I cannot understand how you can take so seriously a post by a troll who is using the name of one of the most odious of all TMPers ever to be banned from this site. You normally do not suffer trolls gladly, and yet this one is okay. I donīt get it.

Well I wont be able to post any games (as they are playtests of Battlegroup or NorthAG) and are purely done to promote the next book we are working on.

I better not post pics of Miniatures as I do it purely to show off the Miniatures and promote the company.

As I'm not a company myself, becoming an advertiser is pointless, and hobby news would be an odd place to put things…

Oh well, if it's what people want, good luck with it. Seems crazy to me, but I dont run the forum. I just post eye candy… well not anymore I guess.

Right, seems that we must be off too and most of what gets published in the Painting Services forum too….

Count me another one who is confused about the policy and what and where, and where not, members can post about miniature products. The only certain thing I know about this whole issue is I won't be renewing my supporting membership.

+1 PiersBrand.

This issue is both confusing and demoralizing. TMP seems much diminished in the last year.

"You'd have to ask whoever wrote that. However, the new policy is hardly draconian… we're just asking that commercial interests pay their own way. It's not fair to TMP or to our advertisers to let 'freeloaders' have full use of our forums. And yes, it also means that we're asking our members not to give 'free advertising' to non-advertisers. I think this is a common sense policy.

And to repeat myself, this applies to commercial announcements, such as new product releases, sales, and convention appearances."

Bill,

Since you are going to police the forums for "announcements" anyway, why not let advertisers continue to post to forums, but simply delete non-advertisers' posts regarding their businesses. The new policy will restrict paying advertisers from responding to inquiries on the forums and necessarily require any responses regarding new products, convention info, future releases to be posted to Hobby News thus possibly creating a log jam of trivial info on Hobby News … info that could be delivered quickly and directly on the forums. It seems far easier to bar non-paying advertisers, but continue to allow paying advertisers free reign on the forums.

Chris

All I have ever expected from operators of forums or platforms is to make their rules public and to apply them evenhandedly.

Is all this really because a guy who has posted precisely once, having been a member for a fortnight, was worried about people getting free advertising?

TMP link

Seriously?

NB These questions are rhetorical.

Is all this really because a guy who has posted precisely once, having been a member for a fortnight, was worried about people getting free advertising?

If the argument is correct, does the source matter?

Count me another one who is confused about the policy and what and where, and where not, members can post about miniature products.

It's pretty simple. If you're just a regular gamer, then we're just asking you not to pass along commercial announcements – new releases, sales, stuff like that. You can continue talking about gaming, painting, playing, as usual.

Can we talk freely about new products from paid advertisers and discuss their sales and convention appearances?

Advertisers are encouraged to make announcements in Hobby News, where you can comment on their announcements.

Not being able to talk about new rules and figures will limit much of what we discuss here

Who said you can't talk about new rules and figures? It's fine to say "hey, I painted this" or "hey, I played this". You just can't post "hey, Flames of Doug has been released and it's on 50% discount right now!"

What about Kickstarters? That makes the entire kickstarter board almost irrelevant if you can't mention them?

It is unfair to our advertisers who have Kickstarters to let other Kickstarters get free advertising on our forum. These other Kickstarters should become advertisers just like everyone else. No free lunch.

Right, seems that we must be off too and most of what gets published in the Painting Services forum too….

Are you in business? If you're a professional painter, I would think so. If you are posting pictures to promote your business, shouldn't you be an advertiser? Wouldn't it be unfair to our professional painters/advertisers to let other painters advertise for free?

As I'm not a company myself, becoming an advertiser is pointless…

Why not encourage the publisher to become an advertiser? Explain how they could promote their products on TMP, offer to help them.

If you want to remove posts by non-paying companies, I think thatīs quite logical, but please leave TMP members out of it.

The problem is that, as we know from experience, some companies will then post their Hobby News using sock puppet accounts, and how can we tell the difference? Remember Khurasan?

And the limitation is specifically for commercial announcements. You can still post about what you are painting, what you are playing.

"If the argument is correct, does the source matter? "

Given that no one who responded to the link agreed that the argument was correct perhaps the source does matter.

I don't think there should have been a change. And it seems other readers seem to support the old ways.

This was not put to a poll as is often the case with rule changes.

Also TooFatLardies mentioned there are Games Workshop boards yet Games Workshop is not an advertiser. What will become of those boards now? How is it that companies that do advertise don't have their own board? When a company that does not advertise gets a board? Where is the fairness in that?

Mike Bunkermeister Creek
Bunker Talk blog

If the argument is correct, perhaps you could elucidate and explain what the current policy is precisely so that a lot of good people are not demonstrably confused.

Whatever it is, and however arbitrarily it is applied, it appears to discriminate against the sort of small companies and enthusiasts on which the hobby has relied for so long.

How this policy helps the hobby or will draw users to TMP mystifies me. I'm sure you have your reasons.

Alternatively, you could drop the new policy. Whatever it is exactly.

Damn! There are not only the post from that "one troll", but there, beside other posts, are also written down the "New Policy", compactly. So many of us, not participated there at first place, see there only the cause, but not result.

Seriously, Bill, you should publish your post from there as separate topic. I may do this by myself, but I write now from handheld device and this is inconvenient to do.

Also I need explanation about the point "It would also get rid of some duplication". What this mean? Google translator translates this very foggy.
Does this mean that talking about news from "Hobby News" on Forums are allowed or forbidden?

@22ndFoot
Is all this really because a guy who has posted precisely once, having been a member for a fortnight, was worried about people getting free advertising?

I was terribly confused at first reading all this and was not at all sure what everyone was talking about. This post clears it up.
I find it AMAZING that all this much attention and hand wringing was caused by a simple "Drive-by Trolling" by some silly er who I'm sure is now sitting happily somewhere laughing his ass off! A half-assed post by a half-wit ignites a literal fire storm of attention. I read the post in question, and I gave it the attention it deserved…..(sound of a toilet being flushed).

I read the post in question, and I gave it the attention it deserved…..

Unfortunately the Editor didn't give it the attention it deserved, but instead used it to draft a new set of rules based on the suggestions.
No one can understand why this Troll had the power to make the Editor do something so damaging to open discussion on the forum. He's never listened to trolls before, but instantly banned them.
What is most worrying is this Thad Blanchette's account is still unlocked and open to post again, so who knows what new rules may be the result of his next post!

Why not encourage the publisher to become an advertiser?

They already are.

But that's irrelevant as I cant post the AARs to the forums now.

I was terribly confused at first reading all this and was not at all sure what everyone was talking about. This post clears it up.
I find it AMAZING that all this much attention and hand wringing was caused by a simple "Drive-by Trolling" by some silly Bleeped texter who I'm sure is now sitting happily somewhere laughing his ass off! A half-assed post by a half-wit ignites a literal fire storm of attention. I read the post in question, and I gave it the attention it deserved…..(sound of a toilet being flushed).

Would that our good editor had had the same response. That he did not and responded with such alacrity, without the usual recourse to polling and the mathematical discourse that goes with it, might suggest to some that "drive-by troll" might not be an entirely accurate description. Who can say?

Also TooFatLardies mentioned there are Games Workshop boards yet Games Workshop is not an advertiser. What will become of those boards now?

People will continue to talk about gaming with Games Workshop? I think you don't understand the new policy…

How is it that companies that do advertise don't have their own board? When a company that does not advertise gets a board? Where is the fairness in that?

Actually, these are boards for specific rulesets. We have many, many boards for specific rulesets. TMP link

If the argument is correct, perhaps you could elucidate and explain what the current policy is precisely so that a lot of good people are not demonstrably confused.

I have elucidated over and over again. See above.

Whatever it is, and however arbitrarily it is applied, it appears to discriminate against the sort of small companies and enthusiasts on which the hobby has relied for so long.

Small companies are still companies, and they can shell out the $5 USD it costs to advertise on TMP. Sheesh.

Also I need explanation about the point "It would also get rid of some duplication". What this mean? Google translator translates this very foggy.
Does this mean that talking about news from "Hobby News" on Forums are allowed or forbidden?

It means Hobby News goes into one place – Hobby News. A Hobby News story is not duplicated on the forum. This enables the forum to be focused on actual GAMING. Big improvement.

What is most worrying is this Thad Blanchette's account is still unlocked and open to post again, so who knows what new rules may be the result of his next post!

Did he do anything to justify having the account locked? Of course he can post again, if he remembers his password…

The problem is that, as we know from experience, some companies will then post their Hobby News using sock puppet accounts, and how can we tell the difference ? Remember Khurasan ?

So what do Khurasan do ?

1) How long must information be public before it no longer counts as "news"?

2) Can a news item be shared AFTER the vendor announces it on TMP? What would be the harm there?

3) Why not just take down posts about which there is a specific complaint instead of a blanket denial?

New Coke. Someone thought that and Windows Vista were good ideas.

Oh, I was going to ask what happened to the OFM/Winston Smith..
Guess I will just whistle past this grave yard

….whistling….

So what do Khurasan do ?

Khurasan set the all-time record for sock puppet accounts on TMP. Hundreds of them! And used them to bad-mouth his competitors, until he got caught.

Oh, I was going to ask what happened to the OFM/Winston Smith..

When his buddy Kings Mountain got his account shut down, the OFM decided to wage war on his behalf, and got his account shut down too.

The OFM then came back as a troll a half-dozen times, posting complaints about TMP. He has some vendetta against someone else who posts on the American Revolution boards.

He's no doubt on TMP now, lurking in some sock puppet account, keeping his head down so he doesn't get caught.

So what did Khurasan do ?

Khurasan set the all-time record for sock puppet accounts on TMP. Hundreds of them ! And used them to bad-mouth his competitors, until he got caught.

So not only on FB has he been caught doing that !

Sorry if I'm being stupid but seeking clarity on what I can and cannot post on the forums under the new rules…

1. If I want to drum up support for a Kickstarter, I can only mention it if the Kickstarter is already a paid-up Advertiser on TMP?

2. I can't post anything like "have you seen those lovely new shiny toys that (insert company of choice) have just released." unless said company is a paid-up Advertiser?

3. What about rule or figure recommendations if someone else starting a new project asks for advice? Will posts recommending stuff by non-advertisers be edited or deleted?

And how do I know who are advertisers? Do I have to check the listing to see if their name is ‘on the list' before posting any of the above?

As I understand Bill's advices..

1. This Kickstarter must be posted on Hobby News and you must drum it there, not on forums.

2. These shiny toys must be posted on Hobby News and you must say this there, not on forums.

3. No rule or figure recommendation questions are allowed, because forums are leaved only for gaming. All rules and figures are moved out to Hobby News section.

As much as I dislike the new policy, #3 is clearly allowed, unless perhaps it is a blatant attempt to circumvent the rule (ask the question with one account, answer it in a very advertising kind of way with another sock puppet account).

Figure reviews are clearly allowed, once again assuming it is a bona fide review.

When you are not allowed to comment even figures and rules, published on Hobby News section, how you may comment figures and rules whose are not published on Hobby News section?

This will be unfair toward these, who publish on Hobby News section and all New Policy is builded up to solve this problem.

It's close to becoming a discussion forum where everyone is afraid to post anything.

At first I thought the phrase "powerful game companies" was pretty funny. Then I kept reading.

I accept that when I visit a site supported by advertising editorial policies may be affected by that advertising. It's free, but bias is nigh unavoidable.

When I pay for site, I expect less of this bias. I hope for and expect chatter about products from the kind of small outfits (two guys in a garage) that do not buy advertising. Where else but TMP could I hope to hear about that kind of stuff?

But now the rule is we can't let each other know about obscure releases if they come from companies that haven't bought advertising?

This may only apply to "announcements", but then we're off to the tedious discussion of what constitutes an announcement. I want to hear about the latest stuff other people think is cool, regardless of whether or not they have an advertising budget.

And if GW and FFG are announced despite not being advertisers are we basically saying they are so big they don't have to pay their way? Alternately, if they're new products are not announced that means if we care at all about the big players we need an alternate source of news.

The *other* question would be which product categories must be advertisers to be mentioned. EG books. If a new military history book comes out can I tell everyone how much I like it if the publisher doesn't advertise on TMP? How about a book on game design? What about dice? Glue? Are we on the road to Quibbletown?

I absolutely understand the need to avoid freeloading. I understand the need to protect TMP as a business. I may not know what I'm talking about, but it seems to me that the best way to protect the business is to have lots of people find TMP useful and delightful. If I can't share some obscure thing I found, if I can't expect to hear about obscure stuff other people found, is TMP morphing into a mouthpiece for those who pay their way? If so why am I paying?

So the game companies are powerful. They decide whether to play on TMP, and we're bound by their decision. Even if we're paying ourselves.

Maybe supporting members can post things in the vein of announcements for non-advertisers? That way TMP is getting some payment, but I can still share cool things I found and look forward to seeing what other people found.

From what I understood, miniature manuf. have to paint nicely their figs, put them on a battlefield and show their new game. Rules writer put teasing aar and displays on line.
Both can write about it for free😛😝😋

We need to support those companies which are supporting TMP.
We need to support free speech about all companies, since such discussion is ratio existendi of TMP.
Greek tragedy conflict.

I am afraid I doubt if anyone would stop discussing about non-advertisers.

Hmm, what about adding the mechanism to automagically show the names of Advertisers in Bold, Name, with golden background or

Medium Headline

?
Anytime anyone would use advertiser name it would show more impressive then non-advertiser? Using existing mechanism, simillar to blocking bad words?

Then users would not need to update catalogue of advertisers, just one person need – Bill himself. It would be more efficient. Yes, it would mean more work for Bill (sorry Bill, we still love You! may the God bless You).

No rule or figure recommendation questions are allowed, because forums are leaved only for gaming. All rules and figures are moved out to Hobby News section

This is incorrect I asked Bill this specifically.

I asked this too.. repeadetly.

"It means Hobby News goes into one place – Hobby News. A Hobby News story is not duplicated on the forum. This enables the forum to be focused on actual GAMING. Big improvement."

Forum is focused on actual GAMING. No miniatures and rules, wich all goes into one place – Hobby News. Hobby News, alas talks about miniatures and rules, is not duplicated on the forum. So no talks about miniatures and rules on forums at all. Especcially no suggestions and asks for suggestions, wich clearly are advertises.

Otherwise the New Policy will be controversial.

At first I was understanding too, that at least after talking about figures on Hobby News we are allowed to talk about these figures on forums also. But not. We cannot.

May be it is better to do vice versa – actual gaming goes to Hobby News and all other stuff stays in Forums?