Lead Adventure Forum
General => Announcements and forum stuff => About Forum => Topic started by: dinohunterpoa on March 04, 2018, 01:17:28 PM
-
Answering all the PMs I've been receiving concerning the new direction this forum is taking, all I have to say is that I'm a LAF member since 2007, and I've NEVER EVER seen this kind of things happening! :o
But I think that commercial-oriented right-wing fanboys are a world phenomena in all areas of human activity nowadays... Sad, but true... :( So the "we're closed to all dialog for reason of the common good" are harsh words being said worldwide, not only here at our dear LAF.
And how this affects our hobby as a whole? What dangers lie ahead? And what rewards?
What about the plastic gnomes and the unicorn cavalry that have been prophecized?
The old Chinese used to say as a polite curse: "May you live in interesting times"... So if this time has really arrived, where are we going from here?
Time will tell, some of fellow LAFers have told me.
And time is said to heal all wounds... :)
In the meanwhile, enjoy the beach, use lots of sunblock and thanks for all the fish! ;)
-
???
Bit too cryptic for me.
What's going on?
-
What's going on?
THAT'S the question everyone is asking!
But as the same old Chinese also used to say: "It's far more important to understand the questions than knowing the answers!" ;)
-
What? I don't even understand the questions.
-
Just read another thread and it's a bit clearer now.
Countdown to thread lock begins.
-
Short answer:
The forum administration and moderation unanimously agreed to ban a user following a near decade of constant abuse, personal attacks on users and moderators, constant public misbehaviour and attempts to derail topical discussions and other violations of the forum guidelines/rules. This was one of three bans over the course of 12 years of LAF.
Some people, without being personally involved and having no justifiable interest apparently are taking this as an opportunity to launch a smear campaign that LAF is now a fascist den of censorship and capitalist agendae, which we strongly refute as an insult to all members and the moderation team.
This is a forum dedicated to the gaming and modelling aspects of the hobby, and off-limits to political or personal agendae, something which may have become less prevalently known or taken for granted and thus not actively reinforced over the last few years.
Long version may follow. I shall not dance to their fiddle and lock this thread, but the gentlemen involved should better take a good breather and calm down before making further ill-informed accusations.
-
I don't see a problem, I actually like a forum to be properly moderated and moderation described as some as heavy handed is never likely to be to my own detriment, then again, I'm not the sort of poster who steps over that line.
The moderation I am seeing is just giving an emphasis on being polite, which seems both right and fair to me. It should be a friendly place to visit.
As with all forums, often it is the 'same old' names that seem to haunt forums as their outlet for needling etc, if their presence is curtailed - good. A bit more posting about painting, modelling and wargaming is perhaps a better way to make LAF a stronger community.
-
We are "users" not "owners" of LAF. If an individual does not like the way it is run, then don't use it!
Personally I have found LAF to be a veritable island paradise amid a sea of online wargaming arseholes. It is one of the few forums that I still visit on a daily basis, so please, keep the conspiracy theories where they belong!
-
We are "users" not "owners" of LAF. If an individual does not like the way it is run, then don't use it!
Personally I have found LAF to be a veritable island paradise amid a sea of online wargaming arseholes. It is one of the few forums that I still visit on a daily basis, so please, keep the conspiracy theories where they belong!
Well put it is all getting a bit angst around here at the moment, haven't a clue what this thread relates to but would put a shiny £5 on who it may be relating to :)
-
lol lol
Cant see anyone taking you up on that bet!
;D ;D
Just taken a shufty and yup I was right ;D
-
I rarely engage in 'debates' like this. But to give it another perspective:
I recently resigned from moderating the Ancients board. It is a very calm and pleasant place, yet as a team member I was exposed to the continuous nagging as well as all kinds of abuses and general nastiness that LAF's mods and admins have to deal with collectively. In the ongoing internal discussions it comes up every day. Ultimately it affected my enthusiasm for the hobby itself. I took the job as a favour to Alex, and so the changeover was not the reason but an opportunity to step down and finally catch my breath.
So, if you take this place and its atmosphere for granted, I call to your attention the work and endurance required to keep it up. If you normally encounter nothing (overly) offensive, bear in mind the importance of rules and a well-functioning team taking swift action. And if you think that there's some hidden, evil agenda to change this place, better remember that it's actually down to your own and every member's contribution to keep LAF a comfortable and pleasant place, even if just by condign restraint.
-
Answering all the PMs I've been receiving concerning the new direction this forum is taking, all I have to say is that I'm a LAF member since 2007, and I've NEVER EVER seen this kind of things happening! :o
Let's not get ahead of ourselves. Moderating a forum is not easy. Since the transfer I have seen one debatable (not wrong, mind you, but debatable) lock, one "No one makes you come here" response (which is not often a strong retort) and one ban of someone who probably had that coming for a long time.
So the moderators are apparently not infallible (go figure...) but I am still enjoying the view, discussions and general atmosphere and don't see a conspiracy evolving thus far, nor any deterioration of Forum moderation.
I say let's give the new management some time to settle in.
-
I'd echo Mad Doc Morris's words, what makes a forum enjoyable is the posts made by the members. It's up to you guys to make LAF what it is.
The Prof. asked me to take over LAF, and I told him that I didn't intend to change fundamentally what it is, and I meant it.
Really, the only change has been the ownership. The moderators are the gang who've been here all along. I've not given them a list of instructions to follow. So the accusations at the head of this thread I presume are all directed at me.
Think I'm far too old to be called a boy anymore.
-
And also the only reason that I signed up in the first place.
;)
+1
-
Answering all the PMs I've been receiving concerning the new direction this forum is taking, all I have to say is that I'm a LAF member since 2007, and I've NEVER EVER seen this kind of things happening! :o
But I think that commercial-oriented right-wing fanboys are a world phenomena in all areas of human activity nowadays... Sad, but true... :( So the "we're closed to all dialog for reason of the common good" are harsh words being said worldwide, not only here at our dear LAF.
And how this affects our hobby as a whole? What dangers lie ahead? And what rewards?
What about the plastic gnomes and the unicorn cavalry that have been prophecized?
The old Chinese used to say as a polite curse: "May you live in interesting times"... So if this time has really arrived, where are we going from here?
Time will tell, some of fellow LAFers have told me.
And time is said to heal all wounds... :)
In the meanwhile, enjoy the beach, use lots of sunblock and thanks for all the fish! ;)
As an on-and-off-and-on-again moderator on this forum I suppose I am one of these "commercial-oriented right-wing fanboys" you are talking about. Well how do you do to you to!
You do not seem to get that the reason you, as you say, have ever-never seen someone banned from this forum is because the admin and moderators have wanted to keep it that way. It is *not* by chance. As long as members just effing enjoy what this forum is really about, like showcasing stonking paintjobs, posting cool builds, helping each other out with their respective projects *all in the same friendly manner as we usually do*, I am sure we will not see anyone banned again.
-
Can't see a problem with what the moderators have done here, I've been here since 2007 and think they've done the forum a favour by getting rid of a negative influence. Good job mods 👏 👏 👏
-
Bit of a non story here tbh, don't have any problems with the forum always been good on here. People come and go on forums and if they are disruptive will not be missed overly.
-
I think a lot of the excitement has been generated by the huge bargains on offer as I sell off some of my kits!
http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=107750.0
What? Hey, I never said I was above exploiting free publicity to fund my exotic lifestyle!
-
I think a lot of the excitement has been generated by the huge bargains on offer as I sell off some of my kits!
http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=107750.0
What? Hey, I never said I was above exploiting free publicity to fund my exotic lifestyle!
I like the cut of your jib Sir!
-
You crazy guy Cubs.
Actually, what a good idea.
-
What rewards indeed? Not quite the plastic gnome but...
When Alex handed over the keys to LAF, I said to my chum Mark Copplestone 'I've been given LAF you know? They love your stuff on there'. 'Should I do a welcome to the new ownership figure?' he said. 'Yeah, sounds good, what figure?' replied I.
Here it is, the International Adventurer. This is a Lead Adventure Members only miniature, you'll have to be a member to buy one. It'll be about 2 weeks before it's turned to metal, and before it's available to buy I do a prize draw. We'll randomly pick 10 LAF members (no Mods) and send them a free casting of the International Adventurer.
Look for a proper announcement soon.
-
I think a lot of the excitement has been generated by the huge bargains on offer as I sell off some of my kits!
http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=107750.0
What? Hey, I never said I was above exploiting free publicity to fund my exotic lifestyle!
Exploiter! lol
-
This has been a very sad business for me. I considered St____ a friend, though we hadn't spoken much in recent years. Maybe out of fellowship I should have fought his corner harder in the moderator discussions. But fellowship runs both ways. He didn't show me much consideration with his constant attempts to derail threads on the board I moderate and turn them into political slanging matches; with his consistently angry and confrontational demeanour, or his downright rude and abusive posts. It got to the point where I was receiving swearword-laden PMs accusing me of protecting him by other members he had upset, just for trying to give everyone a fair shake. But he consistently ignored my requests to let things lie. I didn't really appreciate being put in that position by someone I considered a friend.
So should I have fought his corner harder? Well maybe, but by that point he had worn out all the goodwill there once was and I was exhausted by his nonsense. Fellowship only goes so far. I don't know what happened to make him seem so angry all the time, because he never used to be like that. So yeah, I'm sad that it came to this, but I can't say I disagree with the decision.
Oh, and as for the accusation that we are a bunch of right-wing corporate fan-boys? Well, that's just fake news.
-
Too old to be called a boy? Nah, roun 'ere you'd get called an old boy . . . . . .
I think there have been a lot of 'coincidences' that have led to all of this underlying feeling recently. I'm not suggesting that they are all connected but it may seem that they are all from some perspectives. From my point of view I have witnessed the following things:
- Thread getting locked on the frostgrave thread, which was eventually and fairly explained.
- Another thread getting locked, moved and then removed asking about why it had come to be locked and by someone who could be seen as having a vested interest - prior to the explanation being given.
- Someone else had posts deleted, removed without reason given, raise that concern and then had their post removed.
Now, prior to the recent banning, which I am not in a position of knowledge to back or not, I may have locked horns with said person in a thread. Now, some of my posts were deleted as well. I'm not overly bothered, but no reason was given by message or anything.
Now, I had never experienced anything of the sort like that on LAF before so it was a bit of a surprise to me.
I do think that there are lessons to be learned. With the two related frostgrave posts, would it not have been better to merge the question post with the main thread, thus respecting the poster and then lock the thread so that it was clear their question had been answered without the need to delete it altogether?
Modding isn't easy. But it certainly will be more difficult if you have a set of strict principles to stick to. Again, I am not passing judgement on that, I have enjoyed LAF as much as anyone over the years. And it certainly retains appeal.
I say that as a mod of another forum which I helped to support and yet I visit here too.
Just to be clear, I'm not stating a complaint, just trying to underline why some folk may be feeling a bit uncertain. It isn't all just about one single action I don't think. Just several that have occurred in a short space of time.
One suggestion may be to call the frostgrave section 'official' or something like that so people are aware it is not a place to just shoot off their complaints. Perhaps that could be allowed to be somewhere else?
-
Big up the moderators. The way you enforce the clearly defined rules is what makes this place such a great place to visit.
It certainly saddens me to hear the kind of aggro you appear to have gotten behind the scenes. There’s a few references about ‘much worse abuse on other forums’ like that justifies minor nonsense and abuse on here. The only reason we don’t have that here is down to the diligence of the moderator team here, I for one am very grateful for that.
I also think it’s incredibly poor form to jump on Nick before he’s been allowed to do anything, either positive or negative.
Yet another shit stirring post amongst several this week.
-
@ mcfonz
I'm an ex-mod here and what you've mentioned has always been the way we've done it. We'd remove objectionable posts, posts quoting those posts and posts relating to those spats, as a matter of course; it saved peoples' blushes 'the morning after'. We'd lock posts that were close to becoming spats, but leave them visible. Nothing new, no new direction or anything like that; business as usual.
As for the ban, I recall that the person concerned was the 'co-respondent' at the time of the last ban, four years ago and came within a whisker of going at the same time. I've experienced him as a moderator and judging by the complaints we used to get, he wasn't a favourite of many. If I was asking a question about it, it would be "What took you guys so long?".
Who knows, when word gets round, maybe we'll see some old faces coming back. :)
Yet another shit stirring post amongst several this week.
Indeed and on the same topic too. I wonder when it becomes considered spamming?
commercial-oriented right-wing fanboys
I genuinely take great exception to being called 'right-wing'.
-
I think a lot of the excitement has been generated by the huge bargains on offer as I sell off some of my kits!
http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=107750.0
What? Hey, I never said I was above exploiting free publicity to fund my exotic lifestyle!
lol You're such a pisser-
-
*Other than me offering Cubs money to help fund his playboy lifestyle....
Cub's Playboy Lifestyle Kickstarter, Entry level £100.000
-
I think the mods do a good job. I read another thread which explained why what happened happened . No need for any conspiracy theories.
And +1 to Cubs, his post was very funny.
-
Cub's Playboy Lifestyle Kickstarter Entry, level £100.000
I approve, but I may have to cut back on the hookers at those prices.
-
It wasn't scurv was it? lol
EDIT: Holy crap I was kidding.
-
To all:
Please let's not make this whole thing even more unpleasant than it already is by mocking the person in question.
-
Hands up, I don't know anything about what happened on the Frostgrave boards, which is embarrassing as it's a product I'm involved with. But actually that's why I don't go there, I'm biased so I'd rather the conversations didn't involve me. I'll ask about to find out what happened, I don't think it needs to be discussed here.
Had a quick look at the Frostgrave board. Just a sorry co-incidence that should arise at the same time as I took over.
-
You are probably right Nick. :)
Just to be clear, I wasn't meaning to suggest there are any conspiracies, just that I can understand, and I suspect others can too, why some may have seen those events and had questions about them being linked.
Also, for the record, I play Frostgrave and have no issues with the game. I suspect it will get another round of playing this year when I try to re-introduce gaming to my sister and her boyfriend because it is a brilliant game for that. I am contemplating how to write games for it that don't involve treasure though, so I shall stick a post up about that at some point.
Last thing, and it's advice more than anything else. It's probably best that as a mod, you don't preach be nice to one another and lets just focus on cool miniatures etc - but then accuse a user of shit-stirring. Especially when one of the reasons given for the approach to moderation is to help prevent folk from regretting what they have posted much after the event.
No one's perfect. And if my 11+ years working at a kids home is anything to go buy, change throws up all kinds of issues.
Nick is probably mainly well known around the UK, and perhaps not so well known further afield. And the move from the Prof to Nick has been relatively swift. That will unnerve some people just because it is change, uncertainty and unknown.
I suspect that even if the transition over is minimal and few, if any, changes will be seen (banners aside) then this is just a little bit of dust flung up that will settle down in due course on it's own. Some folk will just need a little reassurance is all, and for that respect is far great than insult.
-
The guy who got banned literally had a skinhead as his avatar and (until recently) the motto "strength through Oi" and yet it's "right-wing" folk who had him removed?
*bangs irony-o-tron* is this thing on?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strength_Thru_Oi!
Unrelated: Anyone know who manufactures 2mm scale violins?
-
There's nothing wrong with being a skinhead. I happen to have HEREFORD UTD SKINHEAD tattooed on the back of my neck, and while my politics are nobody on LAF's business, they are not the politics of the far-right.
I'm not sure this is the place for this, but people who automatically equate skinheads with far-right politics are simply ill-informed, I'm afraid. The original music of choice of skinheads was an upbeat, fast-paced precursor to Reggae, brought to the UK by Jamaican immigrants and adopted by skinheads with gusto. Strength Thru Oi is actually a very good compilation album, and isn't particularly political (at least not in any far-right way). It has The Toy Dolls on it, for God's sake. What a vanguard for fascism they were!
The former member in question may have been many things, but he was no Nazi.
-
The mods are doing a great job. It's unfortunate when people have to be banned but I don't think any regulars would argue with the fact that the person in question had taken a consistently negative/aggressive attitude for a very long time. I've been on forums where people get banned for being a bit annoying whilst the admin has a hangover, so the fact that an entire thread has to be (pointlessly and a bit tin foil-hattedly) made to discuss the shocking event shows how rare it is here. I laugh at the idea that anyone among the team is right wing or commercially motivated. Hat off to Nick - you wouldn't even know that the forum is owned by North Star, he has preserved the LAF exactly as we knew and loved it before the handover, and clearly intends to keep it that way.
-
I think my position has been already put into better words by mcfonz on page two, fear of it being a sign of things to come as i've grown quite attached to LAF and think that for the past few years that moderation has been consistently good.
That said, i think/hope that this is just a temporary glitch.
Also not sure where this whole ''right-wing'' nonsense is coming from, i've never seen any kind of political bent on here and while censorship is bad it's not the preserve of one side, using the logic displayed so far could equally argue that this is some lefty conspiracy lol
-
been out for popcorn,what did i miss? ;) lol
-
There's nothing wrong with being a skinhead. I happen to have HEREFORD UTD SKINHEAD tattooed on the back of my neck, and while my politics are nobody on LAF's business, they are not the politics of the far-right.
I'm not sure this is the place for this, but people who automatically equate skinheads with far-right politics are simply ill-informed, I'm afraid. The original music of choice of skinheads was an upbeat, fast-paced precursor to Reggae, brought to the UK by Jamaican immigrants and adopted by skinheads with gusto. Strength Thru Oi is actually a very good compilation album, and isn't particularly political (at least not in any far-right way). It has The Toy Dolls on it, for God's sake. What a vanguard for fascism they were!
The former member in question may have been many things, but he was no Nazi.
I have a longer reply in the works (me? long winded? I never...) but I just have to chime in to agree with Plynkes 100%.
A very brief history lesson (apologies for any errors or if my dates are off, BTW):
The Skinhead movement originated in the early 70's as purely a working class movement in the UK and commonwealth, not much different than any other trend in the past, be it greasers, Teddy Boys, or so on. They were scrappers and street fighters at times, but they were not racists much less Nazis and one of their main bonds was a love of Jamaican Rocksteady and early Reggae music (there are even songs about the then-skinheads by these Jamaican artists).
By the mid-late 70's the movement was splitting between skins as they began and far-right skinheads and by the late 70's it was a full-on rivalry.
Two things then happened. 1) The idea of the "Skinhead Nazi" became iconic due to clashes just prior to and during the Thatcher election, and Skinheads began to be conflated with Nazis by anyone who didn't know about the subculture before that (i.e. the rest of the world). 2) Most of the non-Nazi skinheads transitioned to the Punk movement (which still preserved some of the military chic that originated with Skinheads, especially the boots), either becoming punks or joining the dreary regular working world as they were now working adults.
So by the early 80's Skinheads were cemented in the popular imagination as Nazis. But for people like Scurv, who was one of those early skins it means nothing more than being tough and liking reggae. He is vehemently anti-nazi and his posting has always confirmed that, as I'm sure many of you know he has strong feelings about colonial wargaming.
-
Alright, I was the one who started That Other Thread, so I suppose I ought to weigh in.
Regarding the person concerned:
There's a lot of piling on and "good riddance" in this thread right now against a fellow who is not here to defend himself (and who I doubt would be bothered to do so if he could), which I find rather petty (I notice this comment has already been made while I was typing this). Everyone ought to consider that as with any internet community or organization, complaints will arise from a vocal minority and that a very one-sided view has and is being presented.
Those of us who quite enjoyed Scurv's company and posts on LAF (and there are a fair few of us - I had quite a laugh yesterday when I noticed one such member had changed their custom title to "FREE SCURV!") had no reason to send the moderation team fan mail in some odd effort to balance out the complaints. Of course he could be blunt, didn't suffer fools gladly, and wasn't much for niceties - which rubbed many the wrong way - but in reading the body of his posts, you will find the vast majority are positive, helpful, or simply inconsequential and everyone who knows him well knows what an honest and stand-up fellow he is. What you see is what you get and that counts for something with me anyway. If his posting is your idea of a poisonous, hateful human you must be fortunate enough to live a very sheltered life (or, as Plynkes made me realize, perhaps you mistakenly assumed he was a Nazi and let that colour your opinion).
Regarding the ban itself:
Several months ago, Scurv was put "on notice" that further transgressions of the rules would be punishable by banning. Fair go. Regardless of what led up to that point, that was how it stood until two days ago when he was banned without notification or warning.
We both spent some time looking at his last couple weeks of posts, and could find nothing which violated forum rules, nor has anyone else who've we'd explained this to. Which is to say, there was no visible proximate cause for the ban itself - it simply came out of the blue. As there is no banlog or similar public accounting for major moderator decisions and any discussion was swiftly shut down, we had to go on guesswork. As this DID coincide with new management, the obvious suspicion was that some people took the transition as an opportunity to "clean house" of an undesirable, without there actually being any immediate justification. No one ever did receive an answer to this question and we still have no idea what was the immediate cause for the ban.
Regarding the forum rules:
As of this posting, this rule has stood for years:
Rule 2.2 Criticism.
The LAF administrator and moderators have no problem with receiving constructive criticism, and most users will also be happy to receive productive replies and incentives. Keep in mind, however, that only posting criticism and not producing/showing your own work will leave people with a poor impression or your character. Do NOT try to become the “Critic Laureate” of LAF – it’s “live and let live.” All criticism is well-received if it is constructive, politely worded and appropriately balanced with praise. Don’t be nit-picky and try being positive.
I have emphasized the very first line here as I do not think this rule is being followed as things currently stand. Not that I expect the mods to endure outright hostility or personal attacks, but fair criticism should be open for discussion. I am, to put it mildly, amazed (and impressed) that this thread has not been locked or deleted yet as has been increasingly the case of late and thank you for that.
Regarding the staff
I strongly feel the mods are members just like any one of us - fellow members rather than any sort of petty authority - yet there's been a disturbing trend towards a more adversarial relationship between staff and members. A banning without any seeming immediate justification outside of "he had it coming" from those who disliked him seemed to signal a new and critical stage of escalation, whether or not this was correct (and we had no way of knowing). A great many members asked me if I thought I would be banned next, such was the uncertainty over what the mods behaviour. Frankly, I couldn't answer that question with any certainty myself.
Without going too far into personal messages, one of our mods has insisted to me that nothing has changed. Yet many of the membership do not feel this way. Unfortunately we have no way of knowing how many feel this way or how deeply because any such discussion is immediately shut down, often with a comment assuming "This will go nowhere as usual" or by simply deleting the post or thread.
The same mod also said they felt "picked on", which to me is yet another sign of an adversarial "siege mentality" between staff and regular members (and I said as much). Without discussion, these emotions will only fester.
This us-versus-them attitude is something which can easily happen in any group where some members have been elevated to leadership positions. We don't even need to use examples as extreme as the Milgram Experiments or the current state of American policing an an analogy, as I would imagine most of us have experienced this at work or school or somewhere else, or, even closer to home, this is exactly what happened to TMP. So there's a very obvious and real example looming over LAF especially as we have many refugees from TMP now.
These refugees as well as other longtime LAF members do not assume "it can't happen here". Hell, "It can happen here" seems to be the zeitgeist of the age, so you'll excuse us if this sounds a bit paranoid to those who disagree.
-
Hereford Utd Skins? lol
'The kids they come from everywhere, the east end's all around'
-
And we're runnin' down the back streets!
Oi! Oi! Oi!
Doctor Martens on our feet!
This day has really taken a turn I never expected. :o
-
We both spent some time looking at his last couple weeks of posts, and could find nothing which violated forum rules, nor has anyone else who've we'd explained this to.
It could be that the posts that tipped the balance had been removed just after posting.
-
And we're runnin' down the back streets!
Oi! Oi! Oi!
Doctor Martens on our feet!
This day has really taken a turn I never expected. :o
All this talk made my wife quite nostalgic for her punk days, which was a blessed relief after the early-80's back-to-the-50's trend where she lived, since she has about the most 50's-unfriendly hair imaginable. lol
I do remember the days of girls in docs, tight jeans, and combat jackets well...
-
It could be that the posts that tipped the balance had been removed just after posting.
First thing we thought of, but neither he nor I could see any of his posts which were missing (I follow his posting, so I saw all he put up).
-
What rewards indeed? Not quite the plastic gnome but...
When Alex handed over the keys to LAF, I said to my chum Mark Copplestone 'I've been given LAF you know? They love your stuff on there'. 'Should I do a welcome to the new ownership figure?' he said. 'Yeah, sounds good, what figure?' replied I.
Here it is, the International Adventurer. This is a Lead Adventure Members only miniature, you'll have to be a member to buy one. It'll be about 2 weeks before it's turned to metal, and before it's available to buy I do a prize draw. We'll randomly pick 10 LAF members (no Mods) and send them a free casting of the International Adventurer.
Look for a proper announcement soon.
Fabtastic. :-*
(Not really sure what this thread is about and don't have time to read it all, but seeing this was worth the cursory browse.)
-
I’m pretty regular here but I haven’t noticed a trend towards adversarial relations with members (plural). How many members have contacted you on this matter? How many have stated that they share this view? I’m not stirring, I just don’t see such a trend and would like to understand the basis of your claim.
Ps: I’ve purposely asked here rather than by PM, as I believe such ‘dirty washing’ should see the light of day.
I've had conversations with a fair few members in recent days and more in the past. I'm not going to go around posting names without consent, but at least a couple have posted in this thread.
I would call it a trend for a couple reasons. The first being that I feel like I'm seeing more locked or deleted threads these days and the mods sounding more curt and tired about any disruptions (subjective, to be fair), the second being that the others who share my concerns have felt that way as well (especially those who are refugees from other failed forums), and the third being that over time the rules about what is allowed seem to have become stricter, such as the closing of the one quarantined off-topic forum we were allowed (which has simply resulted in off-topic discussions being crammed edgeways into other threads now and then) because it was simpler to just disallow such talk entirely rather than moderate it.
I think that if you're fortunate to have never run afoul of a mod, or been a member of a once-great forum which slowly turned to shit, then the signs of the possibility that the same can happen here are not something which really stand out except in retrospect.
Also, threads being deleted masks any trends as many members may never see the complaints made by others and I feel the frequency of locking and deletion has grown.
-
I would disagree entirely Fram, the individual in question was aggressive and I would bet a lot of threads he participated in (not all I might add) to a very direct (I would say rude, crude and point of view) to the point I would not bother looking at the thread.
I could bite if he was trolling but decide whilst on LAF that is not what this forum is about nor has it been since I have been on here since 2006. I have been an active Frother though haven't been on since the forum went through a change a couple of years back and can assure you he would have had a rather different response on their from other members.
If 3 people banned in all the years the forum has been in existence then I don`t see it. I can understand if you are mates with him calling unfair but making such a song and dance smacks a little of overkill to be honest
-
(Not really sure what this thread is about and don't have time to read it all, but seeing this was worth the cursory browse.)
It's basically people saying how great the stuff I'm selling in the bazaar is.
-
I would suggest the higher number of moderator interventions, which is still low compared to the number of posts, is due to the rising numbers of people joining the forum in recent years, not as a result of a moderator coup as seems to be being suggested.
If 3 people banned in all the years the forum has been in existence then I don`t see it. I can understand if you are mates with him calling unfair but making such a song and dance smacks a little of overkill to be honest
I agree with this. There are you and maybe a handful of other members complaining vocally, I imagine most others, myself included, would just like to proceed drama free.
-
The fact that the banning of a member can cause such discussion is surely a show of how well moderated and lenient things have been?
This is the third ban in the forums history, and as such it is noteworthy, but the very fact that this is so rare is sign enough to me that the forum is fine.Imagine if this was DakkaDakka? I'm almost certain I could make an account and get banned in the space of an hour or so for something that might simply be given a polite warning here, Or for nothing in particular! and if someone put up a post asking why I'd been banned you can bet your ass that they'd be staring down the barrel of the ban cannon soon.
-
The fact that the banning of a member can cause such discussion is surely a show of how well moderated and lenient things have been?
I think it says far more about the membership and the forum culture they have created. Mods can't do what they do without the general consent of the membership, even if at times individual members may not agree with what's happened as a result of moderation. Even mods voice their disagreement with each other here when they feel something is off, trust me on that.
Mods can try to model an ideal, but it's down to the members as to whether they choose to subscribe to it. When there is a dissonance, that's when you get rows, frequent bans and members leaving in droves. I can recall a hissy fit or two being thrown here in the past, but even the primadonnas amongst us usually come back and it's not remarked on.
TL/DNR - You get the mod team you deserve. The lack of bans and heavy moderation signifies a membership that generally chooses to treat others in the same fashion they expect to be treated. Moderation happens only when they don't.
-
Can we please stop this now! I got so sick of this crap over on another wargame site that I left.
Please, can just stick to wargaming? If you want to save the world, find justice for all or just want
to have more controversy over nothing then go somewhere else.
-
Can we please stop this now! I got so sick of this crap over on another wargame site that I left.
Please, can just stick to wargaming? If you want to save the world, find justice for all or just want
to have more controversy over nothing then go somewhere else.
This. I like this forum a lot. It’s my go to place albeit I haven’t been here long. I appreciate the work the mods do and I enjoy LAF. I can understand that long term members may be upset about what they perceive to have happened but I saw certain posts and I’n sorry to say I’m not surprised at the result.
I’m going to check out Cub’s fine wares now. Good vibes and happy HOBBY filled posts to you all!
-
I painted stuff today. http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=106573.msg1345779#msg1345779
I read some posts.
I talked about stuff, therefore:
I’m a good member! :D
-
Today I think I helped someone consider a ruleset, and I only swore once while playing Dark Souls 2...
But then, I didn't paint anything today so I think I'm a bad member. :o
-
Gotta say I'm with Ink on this one.
-
Before getting hung up on me personally, as if this is all something created entirely in my own head, bear in mind that I did not start the thread and the member who did has also received a great many PMs. Nor were we the only two creating rapidly-deleted threads yesterday. It's easy to deny a problem exists if complaints are simply disappeared (how many of us mocked the closing of the GW forums for this very reason?). So unless you firmly think I'm out and out lying or delusional, you might want to consider the possibility that others besides myself do not agree with you.
Moreover, in just one page, I've been told that my opinions are "controversy over nothing", simply an attempt to start trouble or drag "social justice activism" into our pedestrian wargames forum (ha!), and that the moderation is light as a feather (I wouldn't say it's heavy, but it's definitely not as light as some people seem to think and after eight years, I certainly remember when it was more relaxed), along with a few me-toos in the bargain. I don't mind taking it on the chin, but none of us are interested in a pointless argument with those who will simply circle the wagons around and deny that has or will ever change, for better or worse (in the interests of keeping the peace, I'll resist the urge to repeat some of the more... colourful terms used to describe such ardent defenders of the status quo).
So I can hardly blame people who choose to remain silent rather than voicing their concerns. They're more likely to simply drift away as they feel unwelcome or out of place. Funny enough, as another thread recently pointed out, posting on LAF HAS declined over the past year. I don't believe this can all be laid at the feet of Facebook but I suppose there are many ways the data could be interpreted.
With respect, I post my concerns because I wish LAF to remain a great place. If I thought it was a lost cause I would simply let it drop off naturally myself (and indeed I have participated less over the past few months), rather than wasting energy in discussing something with no possibility for improvement.
-
Sorry chaps,my post is irrelevant.
-
I have not been here long enough to have a formed opinion. Nonetheless, at least in LAF moderators take the time to explain their decisions and justify them.
-
...got along tolerably well with the moderators(had one or two brief spats Plynkes,Hammers.
I’m aghast, Guy, since I cannot recall any such spat an since I consider you a very valued contributors to this community. :o ;)
-
I’m aghast, Guy, since I cannot recall any such spat an since I consider you a bery valued contributors to this community. :o ;)
Haha,long time ago mate,it was a jocular remark.
I thought no one was going to read my post so I got rid of it,I was wrong lol
Just be decent to one another chaps.
-
You kids crack me up.
Look, it's a forum dedicated to playing with toy soldiers. Nothing more than that.
This is typical of role-players/wargamers. You spend all your life playing games looking for intrigue and excitement. So when the smallest bit of interest in your life happens you try and make it into some drama that must be adventured against.
There is a world out there that would be pissing itself with laughter at the self-importance on display, and how this whole episode reinforces the stereotype that gamers have with the public at large.
I'd have some sympathy with the concerns being expressed if anyone was forced to come here (or any other forum). But you're not. Which makes the Orwellian Big Brother analogies seem as fatuous as they are.
You say Scurv is over it and not bothered. Take his fine example as a lead.
P.S. My only real regret is that I never got to read any of Scurv's past conflicts. From what I've read here he seems to have spent most of his time patrolling the Colonial Board looking for things to take issue with. Since I'm not a colonial gamer I never look at that forum so missed out on all the fun. What a shame they've all been deleted or else I could have some fun reading people's petty internet arguments.
Hm, now who's trying to provoke "drama" (and perhaps hoping the thread will be locked as a result)? Someone who wants to talk about how the place they come to chat with friends is run? Or the fellow who dismisses any such talk with sneering condescension? Not to mention a drive by-slag at someone whose posts you admit you haven't even read. Please.
This passive-aggressive "you can just leave" nonsense is a dodge as old as granny's socks, and it holds water just about as well. Try applying your own suggestions to yourself - don't bother speaking up in this thread if you don't have anything productive to add. It's no different than when members go into threads to complain about miniatures they don't like. Don't do it. It's just plain old common courtesy.
-
I don't know about anyone else but I think this thread has run it's course? People who want to post on the issue have probably done so. I'll echo those above who would like to get back to focusing on wargaming 'stuff'.
As the thread started with a Douglas Adams quote (sort of) maybe one should bookend it too:
For a moment, nothing happened. Then, after a second or so, nothing continued to happen.
-
If you don't want people talking down to you then it would do you well not to act in a manner that requires it.
I wonder if you even realize that Scurv was banned for being less abrasive then you are right now.
-
I don't know about anyone else but I think this thread has run it's course? People who want to post on the issue have probably done so. I'll echo those above who would like to get back to focusing on wargaming 'stuff'.
As the thread started with a Douglas Adams quote (sort of) maybe one should bookend it too:
For a moment, nothing happened. Then, after a second or so, nothing continued to happen.
Well, I'd imagine the weekday crowd might have comments of their own and I'd like to give them at least a small chance at that.
We all know that "this thread has run it's course" is usually code for "this is turning into a fight", so I'll leave off any further replies to the rather chipper chap who joined in tonight.
-
I wonder if you even realize that Scurv was banned for being less abrasive then you are right now.
That is absolutely not true FramFramson, whether you know it or not.
-
I’m going to check out Cub’s fine wares now. Good vibes and happy HOBBY filled posts to you all!
You know it makes sense.
-
I wonder if you even realize that Scurv was banned for being less abrasive then you are right now.
No. Categorically no.
I do not think this thread is going anywhere productive anywhere right now, so I think it is best lock it for the time being before it comes to worse.
It is not going to be removed in order for members to inform themselves and to have a chance to peruse Cubs' fine goods. ;)
On second thought, I urge everyone to please reconsider any statements you might later regret on a personal level before you reply to this thread, and be positively sure that you are contributing to the actual discussion.
-
I wonder if you even realize that Scurv was banned for being less abrasive then you are right now.
Well contrary to what you posted on a previous thread, the fella 'took his ball home' by insisting all his posts be deleted from LAF, so we'll have to take your word for it; those of us who haven't been on the receiving end, or witnessed said behaviour. We also have to take your word that there is some fearful, oppressed silent majority, too afraid to post on this topic, but who are nevertheless somehow besieging the wicked admin here in some sort of LAF-bunker.
It seems to me that the only adversarial relationship here has been dealt with and judging by the bulk of posts in this discussion, in a satisfactory manner. Folk coming here from elsewhere have previously cited other similar individuals being allowed by the admin there to ride roughshod over members as a reason for leaving. Yet here you are taking such a person's corner.
I'm seeing hyperbole, demagoguery and counterfactuals, but no substance.
-
It's a forum, if you don't like something you can/should self moderate first. I had no idea this thing happened, and if the forum had an ignore function, I would have used it on this particular person.
I love this place, the mods are freaking amazing, as are the members. My excitement and enjoyment of the site runs at 110% and has since I joined.
Great job guys (and ladies) thank you for being inspiring and keeping the tone of the place classy and sophisticated.
-
It's a forum, if you don't like something you can/should self moderate first. I had no idea this thing happened, and if the forum had an ignore function, I would have used it on this particular person.
I love this place, the mods are freaking amazing, as are the members. My excitement and enjoyment of the site runs at 110% and has since I joined.
Great job guys (and ladies) thank you for being inspiring and keeping the tone of the place classy and sophisticated.
Thank you, it is nice of you to say. It is just a little bump in the road but it is still good to hear people who recognize our effort to keep the forum that way. At the same time you should know that a vast majority of the post don't need any moderation at all to maintain that atmosphere.
-
I sent this privately after the thread was locked (I had been typing it up to post right then), but SI had originally requested it publicly so here it is (with a few edges sanded down a little, to respect Chris' words on unlocking the thread - SI I'm sure you'll speak up if the content is substantially different from my PM).
I’m pretty regular here but I haven’t noticed a trend towards adversarial relations with members (plural). How many members have contacted you on this matter? How many have stated that they share this view? I’m not stirring, I just don’t see such a trend and would like to understand the basis of your claim.
Ps: I’ve purposely asked here rather than by PM, as I believe such ‘dirty washing’ should see the light of day.
Fram, I was concerned that you might have had quite a rush of LAFers sending you PMs (elsewhere you mention PMs) supporting your claim that, on the part of Mods, there is a “disturbing trend towards a more adversarial relationship between staff and members”. If true that might be worrisome (‘might’, simply because I can conceive of situations where the conduct of specific members might require a strong response with regard to those specific members) but if not true that’s quite a slur. I don’t think you’ve told us the numbers but without them it’s actually quite hard to get beyond what seems to be more akin to an outpouring of emotion rather than the substance of hard facts.
Fram, I’ve asked 3 times but I won’t ask again (I have minis to paint - including some by Northstar! :) - and project threads to update). However, without hard facts it’s difficult to see that your bald claim is justified. Only you really know the totally of the numbers. My own view is that if the claim of such a trend cannot be substantiated by hard facts then the honourable thing to do would be to withdraw it and apologise to the Mods who you do seem to be accusing of partaking in unjustified adversary.
I explained that I've received a couple dozen messages in the last three days, but that I've spoken to others over the course of the past year (or before). I can't give you a hard number because I don't have one. I've talked here, on Facebook, even on Steam. At no point did I imagine I would have to keep track of these because someone might think I was lying in a discussion I never even knew we'd ever be allowed to have. What methodology are you even expecting? How long ago do I go back for conversations to "count" according to your criteria? A few have already moved on because they didn't like LAF - do they count? Personally I think all such conversations count. But that's my opinion.
One of the central issues is the very fact that we DON'T know how many people feel this way precisely because discussion has been shut down in the past. Even without the mods curtailing anything, look at the gut reactions in this thread, with many people rushing to defend the staff.
I didn't realize I was such a grave threat! Is LAF so fragile? What do they think I'm trying to do? Get the staff fired? Buy the moon? Do they think I hate the staff? Don't be silly. I wouldn't bother posting here if I did. All I'm asking for is that the members be allowed a bit of space to question the staff and that staff be a little more transparent - let the lid off just enough to let a little steam out now and then. Hardly anything worth getting all lathered up over.
In any case however you count it, the number of people who've spoken to me might be no more than that couple dozen or it might be well over a hundred, but either way I think it's at least enough that there's nothing wrong with talking about it.
-
Well contrary to what you posted on a previous thread, the fella 'took his ball home' by insisting all his posts be deleted from LAF, so we'll have to take your word for it; those of us who haven't been on the receiving end, or witnessed said behaviour. We also have to take your word that there is some fearful, oppressed silent majority, too afraid to post on this topic, but who are nevertheless somehow besieging the wicked admin here in some sort of LAF-bunker.
It seems to me that the only adversarial relationship here has been dealt with and judging by the bulk of posts in this discussion, in a satisfactory manner. Folk coming here from elsewhere have previously cited other similar individuals being allowed by the admin there to ride roughshod over members as a reason for leaving. Yet here you are taking such a person's corner.
I'm seeing hyperbole, demagoguery and counterfactuals, but no substance.
As I explained to Nick, I was as surprised as anyone about the deletions, because I initially spoke to Scurv in the morning following the ban, which was before he sent a message to Nick. His exact words in that message were [if you really don't want me to be a part of your forum] "you might as well delete all my posts too". I'll leave it to the reader to decide if that constitutes "taking his ball and going home".
As for this "silent majority", I never claimed they were a majority. Nor have they ALL been silent. There have been others in this very thread (and thread another in the same subforum, and in several threads deleted yesterday), where people tentatively offered some very mild opinions - look at how roundabout the first post in this thread started off! The assumption was that anything more direct would be quashed. Given the cheery nature of replies I've subsequently received, why should anyone feeling as I do try to express themselves any further?
(also I'm not sure if dinohunterpoa had any more to say, but he seems to be locked out of posting. However, we think that's a technical issue and not anything intentional on the part of the mods).
-
I would like to say thank you to those readers who have sent me quiet messages of solidarity or thanks. It's nice to be reminded I'm not alone out here and I really appreciate that.
-
Fram. That is not what the said member emailed to me. It was wrong of you to say 'his exact words were' when that wasn't the case. The addition of a couple of words changes the nuance of the statement.
Please lets leave this, I will not cut and paste a private email here to prove a point.
-
Fram. That is not what the said member emailed to me. It was wrong of you to say 'his exact words were' when that wasn't the case. The addition of a couple of words changes the nuance of the statement.
Please lets leave this, I will not cut and paste a private email here to prove a point.
Fair go, I was just going by what he quoted to me verbatim.
-
No worries.
-
So .... it's like, safe to come out now?
(http://blondemomblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Peeping-Zoe-768x1024.jpg)
-
I went to the Bazar to check out Cubs wares, but found nothing that tickled my particular fancy. Now I am unsure how to proceed.
-
the number of members who PMed as it’s a very easy metric to focus on.
Only if it's a valid one. What does it matter if a LAF member spoke to me via PM or Facebook? Why is a message from one week ago more relevant than one from three weeks ago when we're discussing a long term trend? Any number produced with such arbitrary restrictions will be nothing more than a distraction rather than any form of useful data.
-
So .... it's like, safe to come out now?
Well that depends... are you going to show us your nipples or not?
-
Speaking of which, one of my oldest friends had to have his nipples removed as they caused him constant pain. So now we say he has "Noples".
-
cute dog
-
Fram, ...dont you think its time to slow down a little bit now ?
-
I would like to say thank you to those readers who have sent me quiet messages of solidarity or thanks. It's nice to be reminded I'm not alone out here and I really appreciate that.
There'll never be a shortage of people who'll offer to hold your coat, or load your gun (or at least claim they have - always check the chamber first)... just as long as they don't have to do the actual shooting, or face the returned shot and shell.
-
Fram, please don’t send me any more PMs that assert your assumptions about my character, maturity, thinking, purpose, and objectivity, and which by doing so you come across as passive-aggressive abusive. In fact, please don’t send me any more PMs at all. Thank you.
Now what possible reason could you have for posting this in this thread instead of simply sending it as a reply to my message? Get over yourself.
Rest assured that anyone who goes around publicly complaining about private communications won't be receiving any more PMs from me.
By the way, if you're going to make this sort of a stink, you might as well quote me so that others can judge for themselves.
-
You seem to have a very odd idea of what is and isn't appropriate for PMs.
Such a suggestion cannot go unanswered.
Pistols at dawn then?
-
I see you’ve edited your post since I started to reply. My question of you still stands: are you suggesting that I am being untruthful? It is a simple yes or no.
I might've given you a piece of my mind (joke about my not having much to to spare goes here), but I think you're way off the mark.
-
SNIP...... and if the forum had an ignore function, I would have used it on this particular person.
LAF does have an ignore function, in your profile settings you have a "buddy/ignore" option. If you set someone to" ignore" their posts are not shown and you can set pms from them to be blocked.
-
I only ever saw buddy someone when I went to their profile. But I can do it from my profile by managing buddies and ignore. Thank you, I would never have looked there for it :)
LAF does have an ignore function, in your profile settings you have a "buddy/ignore" option. If you set someone to" ignore" their posts are not shown and you can set pms from them to be blocked.
-
Can you guys please calm down. Your conversation will lead to nowhere.
-
It might help to understand what moderators here actually do.
It’s a bit of a shame we’re being painted as a cell of 20 or so closet totalitarians who spend our time plotting how to shut down debate and expel members (remember folks, a whole three people banned in 12 years). This caricature is honestly laughable. Actually 95% of moderation is just dull tidying up, comprising:
- Moving or deleting threads that have been put in the wrong place – very often at the request of the OP concerned
- Occasionally deleting cross-postings on multiple boards (against the forum rules)
- Occasionally adding a ‘Kickstarter’ or ‘Commercial’ tag to topics that fall into these categories
- Very occasionally we step in on a thread to ask people to calm down if they’re getting feisty and threatening to disturb the peace. This, by the way, is almost always prompted by a report or complaint from another member complaining about aggressive or abusive behaviour.
- And once in a blue moon – yes, we have to lock a thread where said people refuse to calm down and have moved into a full-on non-productive slanging match. Or are clearly heading that way.
That’s about it.
The disproportionate anger that a minority have with what they see as ‘heavy handed moderation’ relates to these latter points. They see it as 'shutting down debate'.
Well, if you’re the kind of person who believes it’s your absolute right to say whatever you think when you’re in someone else’s house, whatever their stated house rules, and who also gets a kick out of having a good row complete with personal abuse, then you’re certainly going to find moderation here intolerably heavy handed. That’s because you’re breaking the rules of the forum by flaming other members. So you’re going to get moderated, and you’re probably not going to like that.
I’m certain however, the overwhelming majority of LAF members are not like that at all. They’re just here to talk about wargaming in a polite, friendly, generally constructive atmosphere which they appreciate. They respect and get the longstanding ethos of this forum rather than kicking up against it because it doesn't suit their idea of what a forum should be. The moderators are the same. We’re just here to talk about wargaming and share our projects.
-
Yeah but he is not standing right infront you. Its just some noise from the ether. Cant you just ignore Fram. Someone has to stop first and I would put my bet on you SI :) please.
-
Thanks :)
-
Well that depends... are you going to show us your nipples or not?
No money, no honey.
(https://i.pinimg.com/736x/52/02/ea/5202ea1c82c63c9baab4f985d4ce46e9.jpg)
-
So when the mods were accused of being right wing crushers of free speech for closing the original threads on this subject down, could it really have been we just knew it would descend into disagreements?
Shall we agree these times aren't that interesting after all, and get back to the hobby?
-
Shall we agree these times aren't that interesting after all, and get back to the hobby?
Yes
Edit just to make it clear what the 'yes' was about.
-
So when the mods were accused of being right wing crushers of free speech for closing the original threads on this subject down, could it really have been we just knew it would descend into this kind of squabble?
Shall we agree these times aren't that interesting after all, and get back to the hobby?
I think most already have done so and a few have probably in the process learnt how to implement the Ignore function.
-
Did anyone hear something just then? :?
-
If it's relevant at all to the OP, the moderation of the thread where I was asking questions 'about' moderation made me considerably less interested in learning what the board was like straight off the bat.
It seemed more than odd to lock a thread which was questioning, politely, the locking of threads. It also seemed odd that the moderation in question came with a speech and a load of rebuttals so the lock came across like a simple 'last word freak' lock as nobody was insulting anyone or whatever the other rules were, it hadn't even broken 2 pages.
So while I haven't PM'd Fram cos I have no clue what 'Scurv' did or didn't do, I can see his point of view at least.
-
I think the forum’s attitude towards moderation is one the least intrusive I’ve ever seen on the internet.
I think the only thing ‘interesting’ about these times is that people sssm to think they have a right to say exactly what they want and not be challenged on it in relation to what are clearly defined rules.
I keep coming back to LAF (whilst I don’t post a lot) purely because of how apolitical it all is, without people throwing their weighty online personae around. Long may that continue!
-
If it's relevant at all to the OP, the moderation of the thread where I was asking questions 'about' moderation made me considerably less interested in learning what the board was like straight off the bat.
It seemed more than odd to lock a thread which was questioning, politely, the locking of threads. It also seemed odd that the moderation in question came with a speech and a load of rebuttals so the lock came across like a simple 'last word freak' lock as nobody was insulting anyone or whatever the other rules were, it hadn't even broken 2 pages.
So while I haven't PM'd Fram cos I have no clue what 'Scurv' did or didn't do, I can see his point of view at least.
Could you tell us what the specific thread was titled?
-
I used to moderate - in fact was the first external moderator - at the Warlord forum. It was a thankless and dreary task. I only ever banned one person, who definitely deserved it. It took a lot of discussion with the forum owners, and much leniency, but eventually he signed his own warrant. So it goes.
I’m also a moderator at GHQ Models, where I’ve been “cama” since about 2004? That is an easy forum to moderate. In fact all I usually do is kill the odd spammer. GHQ will always be my favourite miniatures company.
I wouldn’t want to moderate again. It really does kill the love of the hobby.
-
It seemed more than odd to lock a thread which was questioning, politely, the locking of threads. It also seemed odd that the moderation in question came with a speech and a load of rebuttals so the lock came across like a simple 'last word freak' lock.
My point - explained on that thread - was that the topic you were keen to have a public debate about (choice of moderator on a particular board) wasn’t a matter for public debate, but something you should feel free to raise with the forum owner.
A discussion with everyone piling in with their views wasn’t going to get anybody anywhere. Because moderator appointments aren’t crowd-sourced. Nor is it remotely fair on the moderator in question to make him personally a topic of public conversation where everyone can chip in their views.
Heavy-handed, totalitarian stifling of debate? Or simply saving a load of people wasting their time offering thoughts on something which isn’t in their gift. Depends on your point of view I suppose.
-
My point - explained on that thread - was that the topic you were keen to have a public debate about (choice of moderator on a particular board) wasn’t a matter for public debate, but something you should feel free to raise with the forum owner.
A discussion with everyone piling in with their views wasn’t going to get anybody anywhere. Because moderator appointments aren’t crowd-sourced. Nor is it remotely fair on the moderator in question to make him personally a topic of public conversation where everyone can chip in their views.
Heavy-handed, totalitarian stifling of debate? Or simply saving a load of people wasting their time offering thoughts on something which isn’t in their gift. Depends on your point of view I suppose.
Which may or may not be a reasonable point of view and I may or may not have had a reasonable reply.
Neither of which mattered because the thread asking about locking was locked and the bizarre instruction to privately email the owner of the forum about it was the seeming advice given. And apparently I can reply to it here, on a vaguely related thread about it, but not on the actual thread.
I don't really want to argue about it though, nor was I particularly 'keen to have a public debate' about the original issue. I'm just letting Fram, and whoever was arguing with him, know that yes, other people were talking about similar issues.
-
I'll put my hand up and say that I also have expressed some sympathy with Fram.
But only because the disappearance of my own posts without any form of notification or reasoning. I wasn't warned so I can only think that they were deleted to help 'stifle' more responses. That's fine but it would have been nice to be told so I'm not left there thinking what has happened when the posts I had replied to were still there.
Maybe a clarification of 'rules' are needed. Because honestly, I'm not sure about them. If the things like the Frostgrave child boards are 'official' and to be more sensitive to other posts then that needs to be clear.
Personally, I think no ill of the people behind this place - I know how tough it can be at times. I'll always support transparency, because I think informing people encourages understanding.
Hence I like that you have the GW thread so all of that can be kept to one place. You can then remind people to take their beef there rather than express it somewhere which is more destructive than useful to an otherwise well meaning thread.
-
Rules:
http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=16293.0
I don’t think the rules specific boards are treated any differently to any other, we’re just fortunate to have the authors here to field answers on specific questions or keep players updated on new releases etc.
-
Thanks Mr.J.
I think they might need a ruling though. If complaints are not to be voiced there - which is fair enough is they are to act as a resource.
I have no issue with who is moderating it, just clearer boundaries around them.
E.g; LAF is lucky to have authors, sculptors and rules writers amongst it's number. From time to time 'child boards' are set up so that they have an area to support the community with their creations. These are not areas to attack or complain about the author or indeed their products. Any posts of this nature will be deleted. These people do not have to come to LAF nor share their thoughts and answers to rules queries here, as a mark of respect for that, they are extended a level of protection to insure such luxuries remain available to the LAF community.
-
I'll put my hand up and say that I also have expressed some sympathy with Fram.
But only because the disappearance of my own posts without any form of notification or reasoning. I wasn't warned so I can only think that they were deleted to help 'stifle' more responses. That's fine but it would have been nice to be told so I'm not left there thinking what has happened when the posts I had replied to were still there.
Well that's not right, I agree. On the rare occasions when I have to lock or a post, I always give the reason (even if you don't agree with it) and I try not to delete a post without sending a PM to say what I've done and why. Unless it's really really obvious...
-
I'm sure it was just a mistake - no worries. I'm certainly not bearing any hard feelings about it.
We all have a lot more going on than to carry that sort of addition woe with us!! :D
-
I am merely a droplet of water in a very large pond but this thread seems a little out of place.
The forum is designed to showcase the building and painting of miniatures. Right?
The forum is supposed to be friendly and encouraging.
The forum is owned, operated, and funded by a group of dedicated workers.
You can use it for free.
Most businesses benefit from boards that highlight their product. These are good for general users because we can trade ideas and discuss rules. Most writers seem open to new ideas. The new Frostgrave rules were critiqued and discussed. After a while it felt to me that certain users were looking to 'push' buttons. Say your peace and move on. It is a hobby site and should be treated as such.
-
I'm sure it was just a mistake - no worries. I'm certainly not bearing any hard feelings about it.
In some cases, though, we might remove some postings which, in itself, were not a "violation" or "offence", but part of the discussion that was leading nowhere and not contributing to the original topic.
In order to restore the discussion's direction, it may be the least problematic issue to remove these posts as part of the section to be excised, but we strive to only remove such items if they do not fit into the discussion anymore once the problem posts have been removed and the thread cleaned up.
This is obviously unfortunate, but sometimes unavoidable. We try to be as precise as possible, but sometimes there is a bit of "collateral damage".
-
If that's the case, then a post on said thread stating that some posts had been removed for fear of going drastically off topic, would have gone a long way to reassuring folk, such as myself, that they hadn't posted anything wrong as such.
Just deleting stuff outright without any announcement isn't particularly cool in my books. I know if it involves several people you can't pm them all - hence a post.
Otherwise stuff is just 'going missing'.
-
Actually 95% of moderation is just dull tidying up, comprising:
- Moving or deleting threads that have been put in the wrong place – very often at the request of the OP concerned
- Occasionally deleting cross-postings on multiple boards (against the forum rules)
- Occasionally adding a ‘Kickstarter’ or ‘Commercial’ tag to topics that fall into these categories
- Very occasionally we step in on a thread to ask people to calm down if they’re getting feisty and threatening to disturb the peace. This, by the way, is almost always prompted by a report or complaint from another member complaining about aggressive or abusive behaviour.
That’s about it.
This sums up my experience as a moderator perfectly. I typically let a thread run its course even after getting a complaint, if the 'rule breaking' is on the subjective side. I've deleted maybe two threads in my entire term as a mod- and they were clear cut violations.
Not quite sure how to feel about being associated with the term 'right wing'. On one hand it is amusing, on the other I should probably find it offensive ;)
-
Well, I think the last couple pages demonstrate pretty clearly that if there's a problem, it's really more a communication issue more than anything else, which really isn't all that far off from what I was saying in asking for a bit more transparency. Misunderstandings turn into confusion and confusion can easily turn into anger or resentment or such (wait... that's the not the Yoda line...).
I don't think anyone, including me, accused the mods of being fascists or right-wing or any of that silliness. Saying a relationship is getting somewhat adversarial is a far cry from goose-stepping! Let's try to avoid invoking Godwin's Law, eh? If anything, the current mods have responded with some of the most open-minded and civil replies in this thread.
I don't really have any request beyond everyone just trying to stay mindful of how what you're doing or saying (or not saying), might appear to someone who doesn't have the information you do.
-
I don't think anyone, including me, accused the mods of being fascists or right-wing or any of that silliness. Saying a relationship is getting somewhat adversarial is a far cry from goose-stepping! Let's try to avoid invoking Godwin's Law, eh?
Maybe you should re-read the very first post of this thread.
But I think that commercial-oriented right-wing fanboys are a world phenomena in all areas of human activity nowadays... Sad, but true... :( So the "we're closed to all dialog for reason of the common good" are harsh words being said worldwide, not only here at our dear LAF.
You are technically correct that it is not a direct accusation I suppose, but if he's not talking about us, who the hell is he talking about?
-
Fair enough, though that's still a ways off accusing anyone of being a fascist. I don't think anyone here was playing at being Rick, the People's Poet. ;)
I suppose these real world concerns are pressing hard enough these days that they're hard to put out of mind even in our little (nominally apolitical) hobby haven.
-
And I don't even want to know where or how Cubs found that image.
-
Yes, I can't remember, and can't be bothered to go back and look, but I think "right-wing" may have mutated into "fascist" at the point in the thread when, as Symarip once so succinctly put it, the skinheads dem a come.
-
Marchin' to de mooooon!
-
The best thing about this thread is leaning about the Ignore setting. Thanks!
-
Thought LAF lacked an ignore function, as I couldn't find one months ago, though I probably wasn't looking in the right place or missed it if referred to by another name, like asking for customer service and the automated system not recognizing the term - very frustrating. lol I've encountered two jerks here and while a sternly worded response would be de rigueur elsewhere, here I'd possibly run afoul of the establishment, with the villain laughing off to another thread. :(
AFAIK, this is the first time that I've had to find out who was banned, as no one here had referred to or are avoiding referring to him/her by username, like a latter day damnatio memoriae. lol
Don't really have a problem with the moderators, though I'd hope no will start sycophantically saying "Nick's House, Nick's Rules!" lol
-
Thought LAF lacked an ignore function, as I couldn't find one months ago, '
I am not 100% sure but I believe the Ignore/Buddy function was implemented with the upgrade and move and of the software to leadadventureforum.com.
AFAIK, this is the first time that I've had to find out who was banned, as no one here had referred to or are avoiding referring to him/her by username, like a latter day damnatio memoriae. lol
Banning is not something we take lightly. Believe it or not, the discretion is out of respect for the concerned party. But anonymity is of curse difficult to upheld when said party wishes to have all his posts deleted in the process: it leaves some glaring holes behind. This is by the way a wish which I don't think will be granted in the future.
Don't really have a problem with the moderators, though I'd hope no will start sycophantically saying "Nick's House, Nick's Rules!" lol
Nick's publicly said (I can find you the link later) that he wants to LAF to run along as usual. In the transition he asked all moderators to stay on, which is a way to ensure that. There will of course be changes. I do not know exactly what those will be, but if there is one thing the handling of these current affairs has ensured me, it is that Nick doesn't want to do anything without listening to the moderator and admin collective (there are some 20 current and emeritii of us).
As Captain Blood has laid out in a previous post, moderation is a pretty mundane set of tasks. As I know myself and the others we do it for the good of The Hobby, because many of us have become friends and because it is satisfying to be involved. As I know myself and the others none of us are people who you can boss around to do thinks you don't believe in.
EDIT: Here is the link to nicks "statement"
http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=106986.msg1334363#msg1334363[/color]]http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=106986.msg1334363#msg1334363 (http://[color=blue)
-
I think its time for a different take on the situation.
I find Matt's defence of his friends Admirable,and impassioned. I'm of the opinion for his part he's much the better friend.
I equally admire the willingness of members to defend the volunteers who maintain and police the underpinning principle of mindfulness that is fundamental to the longevity and success of this forum.
I would like to make some impartial observations.
Over the last four months there's been a rise in self entitled posts both in behaviours imported from other gaming communities and in some extent in the replies from established members.
(Which on a personal note has led to question how much longer will I remain a member if these kinds of posts become the norm?)
This has led to a noticeable rise in visible moderators interventions.
Because these have in the past been few far between they've tended to go un noticed by the majority of members.
The sudden visible activities of mods' and the need for the enforcement of the rules on conduct within the forum .
Have rattled the nerves of many here as the fear of this forums decent into the anarchic clash of egos. That's poisoned many other forums.It is quite right to question direction and motivations.As Members and Supporting Members.(for those who don't know. A supporting member is a member who's made a financial donation to the up keep of the site.((in my case not that much and not that often)) it doesn't give you leverage or superiority over other members. Only a statement that you've enough faith (at that time)in the conduct of the running of the forum that your willing to help maintain its existence with a financial contribution.)
The reality is forum life has evolved.Due to both the membership and volunteers the need for enforcement has been virtually nil. There for the protocol for dealing with issues hasn't kept pace or even evolved. This is no fault of the Professor,or the mods,and most certainly not the new owner.
This passionate discussion has raised the need for ,and the exception of better,communication.
It was a grave error on the part of moderation team to exceed to the request to remove his contributions.
However well intentioned your action were(I've no doubt they are.)
By removing all his posts ,You destroyed all public evidence of misconduct.
Allowing him to appear the misrepresented victim of heavy handed elitists .
This has undermined some members confidence in the efforts of mods to remain impartial.(I don't expect this to be fool proof,nor should anyone else. ) Which is a difficult and thankless task.
I'm of no doubt that at some point there will be a guest on the forum,Having the last laugh.
Fortunately there are some positives to move forward with.The status quo can be returned and faith in moderation (I don't believe its particularly damaged . Just needs Some spit and polish.)With a seen to be doing approach .Rather than just reaction. I'm not for a second suggesting you open your decisions upto debate. Only make a qualification of action and absolutely not a justification of an action. This after all a privately owned entity not an entrenched right.
The simple use of a statement from the moderation team . In the forum News section Stating a member has lost membership,a brief summary of how you got the point and how often you'd contacted an individual
Over their conduct nothing two in depth just an outline .also state that as of that date all that members threads are lock.
Don't make this a topic. It's just a statement of transparency. It only needs to be up for a maximum of thirty days and then removed.
This allows people who are so inclined to read through the actions of the individual.Removing the 'martyr to the will of The Man.Syndrome that accompanies. Private processes with public consequences .
-
Not sure why this site has to explain to the rest of us as to why a decison has been taken to have someone leave the forum and to identify that person.
Not sure why there are people who go on about this as though it is a central aspect to our lives and feel the need to be the voice of accountability or that we all seem to need reasurance of some description.
I visit here because I am a wargamer and I like it here. I choose to come here and I am grateful that the site exists and there are people who manage it, so that I can enjoy it. I don’t visit every wargame forum, I am glad that I have a choice.
As an aside, I added some turret detail to an M-10 Tank destroyer this morning and am playing a wargame today.
(Edit for grammar)
-
And Tin Shed Gamer makes a good point.
The deletion of my posts had nothing to do with the banning of said person in that it occurred before that happened. I also didn't see any removal of the post I was responding to.
There is clearly a conflict that has been raised in this thread between how moderation is conducted as expressed by the mods.
I was happy to leave it as a mistake/accident until this:
In some cases, though, we might remove some postings which, in itself, were not a "violation" or "offence", but part of the discussion that was leading nowhere and not contributing to the original topic.
Which was directly at odds with this:
Well that's not right, I agree. On the rare occasions when I have to lock or a post, I always give the reason (even if you don't agree with it) and I try not to delete a post without sending a PM to say what I've done and why. Unless it's really really obvious...
I ended up posting a response to the thread my post was removed from anyway, because the original post still existed. My post had been removed. I took it as a glitch or something, but only later realised that posts that had been posted after mine were still there - and indeed some responded to the same post.
And I agree with Tin Shed, it's just a bit of polishing. Otherwise confusion ensues, which inevitably leaves room for accusations to be thrown. And I remain to not see this as a 'huge issue' - just one that needs clarity.
-
As for emotions running high, well some people are fond of saying this is just some forum. But for some people it's also one of the places they come to meet and chat with their friends every day.
Whether it's a forum, a local club, or the pub down the road, it's easy to understand why a member might take an interest in how such a venue is run.
(Although they've really got to figure out a way to serve beer on here. I mean it was started by Germans for Flip's sake... you think they'd be all over solving that little engineering problem.)
-
So to sum up, an incident occurred,
others have seen it as heavy handed,
some don`t
others see something behind this or liberties on rules,
others don`t
some random tempers fraying to a limited point (as rather tame
Others inject humour,
some don`t see it as humour or a deflection
Others challenge volunteers
some support volunteers
so what is the outcome for this, who do we sack, tar and feather, place on a public pillory!
not really sure where everyone is going with this thread to be honest.
In essence I am sure all have learnt that things cannot be perfect in every way nor infallible nor are our own views necessarily shared by others
can`t believe it has rumbled on for some 10 pages :)
-
Alright, folks, please would EVERYBODY involved calm down a little. I have pruned the string that was strongly veering off-topic and moved the entire thread to the "About Forum" section since it does address issues about the very forum.
I think, though, that folks have made their point(s), in one way or the other, and maybe we are at a point where further discussion will not yield immediate results. I don't think we're going to be more productive if we devolve to mutual accusations, but it might be best for all involved to sit back, take a breather and let what has been said sink in for future consideration.
I'd also remind folks about the forum rules (https://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=16293.0), specifically 1.4, 1.7 and 2.2. The rules are, by necessity, not hard and fast, but their prime intent is to keep the forum a civilized place, and are intended to apply to all. In order not to unduly escalate issues in the future, it might be worth considering if an issue could be more directly or effectively raised by using the reporting function or addressing the responsible moderator or contacting the administration.
Thank you for your attention. This thread will remain in the open and unlocked, but I strongly ask EVERYBODY to consider, prior to posting, if you are actually contributing to the discussion or re-treading issues that have been discussed.
-
Chris,
You post ,holds the right balance of communication and transparency . The reference to the forum rules,qualify your decision.Nothing more.
In no way do you seek to justify your action with an explanation.
Simple ,effective and clear.
Couldn't ask for much more.
Cheers.
Mark.
-
Well, that's 20 minutes of my life I won't get back. A non story if ever there was. Forgive me, "The Archers" is about to start, an every day story of country - folk with real drama!
-
...It was a grave error on the part of moderation team to exceed to the request to remove his contributions...
Just a general point and in no way adding or subtracting from this post's topic.
Under the new data protection rules - GDPR - enforceable from May of this year - the mods would have no choice but to comply with a request like this as under GDPR there is the "new" right to erasure (‘right to be forgotten’)
Sorry if this is a bit geeky\legalese but I'm heading this up where I work so need to know this stuff. ::)
-
Just a general point and in no way adding or subtracting from this post's topic.
Under the new data protection rules - GDPR - enforceable from May of this year - the mods would have no choice but to comply with a request like this as under GDPR there is the "new" right to erasure (‘right to be forgotten’)
Sorry if this is a bit geeky\legalese but I'm heading this up where I work so need to know this stuff. ::)
Good to know. I am required to read up on quite a bit of that stuff @ work but have so far not considered how it applies to my hobby.
-
Good to know. I am required to read up on quite a bit of that stuff @ work but have so far not considered how it applies to my hobby.
That really is interesting.
What country or region do those rules apply to?
-
That really is interesting.
What country or region do those rules apply to?
The EU. I dont know if the UK needs to comply
-
That really is interesting.
What country or region do those rules apply to?
Also dealing with the new regulation at work, we will be working with an external advisor as it's quite complex and with hefty fines thought I read 4% of annual turnover. Think the regulation is for the entire European Union. Apologies for the slight derailment of the thread.
On the matter of the forum issues, I fully understand and follow the ruling of the moderators. Never experienced overmoderating and have always been pleased with the atmosphere on the forum because of their work. Thumbs up and keep up the good and hard work!
-
Just a general point and in no way adding or subtracting from this post's topic.
Under the new data protection rules - GDPR - enforceable from May of this year - the mods would have no choice but to comply with a request like this as under GDPR there is the "new" right to erasure (‘right to be forgotten’)
Sorry if this is a bit geeky\legalese but I'm heading this up where I work so need to know this stuff. ::)
Does that apply if you post under a pseudonym? Right to be forgotten is your actual name I believe.
-
Does that apply if you post under a pseudonym? Right to be forgotten is your actual name I believe.
I am sure we will set up a commission to look into that. Hohum...
-
The EU. I dont know if the UK needs to comply
Since the UK will be in the EU by May 25th, the Data Protection Directive's rulings will apply immediately and fully without requiring national law, although individual regulations may be issued by national legislative bodies in compliance with the minimum stipulations.
In Germany, though, there is legal debate whether postings are personal data (strictly speaking, only the associated IP, if so tracked, is). Therefore, a case might be reasonably made that one may request the deletion of personal data stored as part of the member account, whereas postings might not fall under Data Protection Law. The relevant EU DP directive ruling specifies personal data explicitly.
My line of work, too.
-
Living in interesting times indeed.
-
The EU. I dont know if the UK needs to comply
It does and is a bleeding nightmare having to tackle it at my workplace too
-
The EU. I dont know if the UK needs to comply
Actually, it's not countries, it's citizens. So EU citizens wherever they reside. (How non-EU countries will be compelled to "obey" is unclear. However, some of the training I've undertaken is actually on US sites where they explain that it "applies to US companies employing EU citizens."
With specific regard to UK, Government has already stated that GDPR compliance is mandatory after the country leaves the EU.
Personally, I don't think its as big a deal as many are making out. Providing the changes to personal data regulations are understood compliance shouldn't be too difficult. As always with this type of change huge numbers of consultants, trainers and other professional money-makers have jumped onto the bandwagon. ::)
Apologises again for any thread derailment.
-
lol that doesn't make me look draconian at all.
I was aware (to a degree as I've not read more than a head line on the subject) of the impending legislation. In hindsight I should used the phrase 'in hindsight ' in that sentence.
My musing on this used an example of thirty days before removal and evaporation into the ether. Not actual instance on . The point I was trying and failing to make ironically is about communication.
The individual in question had by his own hand made his membership untenable. So an unpleasant decision was made and acted upon. Because this is an action that's virtually unheard of on the forum. People simply do not have enough experience of these situations to get things 100% right all of the time.
The almost Orwellian perception of mods . Will never completely disappear.
If you have a code of conduct that is expected and re enforced (excuse the choice of words) by a body. Then its important that those people are seen to be doing, as it maintains confidence and continuity.
Although this is a privately owned site. Its a symbiotic relationship that requires confidence and trust from all involved. However this should not be misrepresented as entitlement.
That's rather my point .You remove someone that's been so publicly visible,and vocal. an
Then acceded to his request without a public notification of his removal and request (at this moment in time not a legal requirement although the point would still be valid) before its removal. Then you run the risk of looking like the aggressor .
I'm not suggesting you do not remove the threads and notifications. Simply communicate the intent and once an agreed time and date is reached then remove both the notifications and the threads .
Although the original musing was an example of thirty days it could all be ,done in thirty minutes. Again just musings.
As the new legislation isn't mine to quote. I'd like to assume it has some provision has been made for antisocial conduct. Otherwise were in for a whirlwind of hit and run tolls running riot across all forms of social Media.
Mark.
-
It does and is a bleeding nightmare having to tackle it at my workplace too
Except the UK version includes exemptions for immigrants, so the GDPR only partially applies to them. On the whole, I am very much in favour, and worked on similar style legislative proposals in Australia, so good to see the EU actually implementing it.
From an individual's perspective it gives you an absolute right to view, and where necessary correct data held on you by all sorts of bodies. That's a very good thing in my book.
From a wargames perspective, it is a big catch all, with many clubs likely to fall foul of the regs, as they will simply be unaware. There are easy steps to take to correct this of course. As has been pointed out,there are plenty of consultants and companies looking to make a fortune, but essentially:
1. tell people what data you are collecting,
2. get their express permission to collect it,
3. let them see it/amend it, if they want to,
4. manage it securely, and
5. only use it for the purposes expressly delineated when the information was collected.
-
It does and is a bleeding nightmare having to tackle it at my workplace too
I am glad I am not alone in this. I am head of collections at a museum and pretty much all of my job is collecting various forms of personal data. I am having all kinds of fun with this legislation!
But in the end I think it will work out fine and it definately is not as dangerous as some people will have you believe. The massive fines are really meant for big coorporations like Microsoft, apple and facebook, so that they will at least feel a teeny tiny sting of the fine. No one is comming after hobby clubs or forums.
-
Just as an aside, the fines for non compliance are % of turn-over. As LAF has no income and it's all cost, that'll be interesting.
I'm just been flippant of course, we will en devour to do make sure everything is ticky-boo here.
-
(http://naughteesclothing.co.uk/ekmps/shops/naughtees/images/i-am-spartacus-t-shirt-14853-p[ekm]270x131[ekm].jpg)
But please keep that to yourself.....
-
Just as an aside, the fines for non compliance are % of turn-over. As LAF has no income and it's all cost, that'll be interesting.
I would imagine North Star would be safe in any eventuality, they would probably go after the person/organisation which registered the domain name, i.e. Daniel at Wargames Illustrated ltd
-
Does that apply if you post under a pseudonym? Right to be forgotten is your actual name I believe.
If an EU resident can be identified—directly or indirectly—by a piece of data, every company that’s handling that data must be GDPR-compliant. This data includes names and ID numbers, along with location data, cookies, IP addresses and more. The GDPR also classifies genetic and biometric data, such as touch ID metrics, as personal data. As an indication of how the EU views personal information, the legal definition couches it as a human right...
Or, as I put it in my presentation for work: "in defining Personal Data the legislation gives the broadest interpretation possible..."
Anyway, I don't think LAF has anything to worry about, just going back to my original point, if a member requests that all of their posts be removed, the mods will do this, as has been demonstrated, but if they declined, then there might be some hassle.
-
Just putting in my two cents here.
I am bright, fluorescent red in my politics and have never been censored on LAF. In fact, the one time a certain sure ‘nough rightwing fanboi began stumping here with his “rah, rah, go team!” propaganda for his country’s armed forces and their wars, I complained and the mods swiftly backed me up.
My experience is that LAF — unlike a not-to-be-named miniatures site that is indeed to partial to rightwing fanbois, open white supremacists, and middle-aged guys who appreciatevsex with 15 year olds — REALLY means “no politics” and applies that rule with an even hand.
Three bans in twelve years? I don’t think any moderated site I know is that liberal. Tip ‘o the hat to the new owner and my fondest hopes things will continue, as promised, the way they always have. I know this particular commie snowflake will be screaming the loudest if they don’t. But nothing indicates that they won’t. ;)
-
My own experience with LAF over the years I've been here have been that it's an unusually civil forum. Unusual in the sense that heated arguments are very rare, and when they do happen, the people involved seem to keep much more balanced and emotionally stable. LAF's version of "nasty blow-up" is everyone else's version of "slightly annoyed".
And I like this. It's breath of fresh air, and a ray of hope against the pessimism that comes with age.
My only issue with the recent kerfuffle was how the mods responded to the reaction by getting personally offended, rather than thinking about how the situation might look from the perspective of people who had literally none of the info they were privvy to. I don't question the banning either way, as I didn't personally see any of the interactions that precipitated it. I don't question their reasons for removing said former member's post history, as once explained, they make sense.
But BEFORE it was explained, it legitimately looked weird in a bad way. It didn't turn out to be bad, but the appearance of such was an unintended but IMO not unpredictable byproduct of the terms of the situation. The only way this wouldn't have happened is if people just never noticed that the member in question and all his former posts were gone.
Instead of getting offended and trying to reframe peoples concerns as weird quasi-political extremist conspiracy theories, it would have been better to acknowledge that this was just a "between a rock and a hard place" decision and reassure people.
I'd strongly urge the mods to consider what happened from the POV of the ordinary members who had no idea what happened or why or who made what decisions, or even if the people who made those decisions were the familiar mods, or somebody new. All we saw was forum member get scrubbed as thoroughly as possible as quietly as possible. And when we voiced our concern, while we did get an explanation, we also got a line about how this was being considered an insult (with an implied comparison to the insults the former member made towards mods who tried to temper him, implying a warning to any involved in that thread).
In the first page of this thread , this was followed up by hyperbolic accusations of a "smear campaign" and posters having "agendas" about politics and capitalism and whatever, and the strange assertion that mod behavior is of "no justifiable concern" to the members of a board who are subject to it.
Whatever fights the offending member got in happened when I was offline, and by the time I came back had been redacted, so while I knew he didn't always get on with everyone, I thought it was just light occasional friction, and had no idea he'd been that big of a problem. So his banning appeared very "out of the blue". The mods may have been very aware of the problem, but by redacting his public scuffles when they happened, they unwittingly created the public illusion for any who weren't there at just the right moments that he was just a normal guy and not a problem at all. Stop here, and go up and reread the first paragraph of this post, and you'll see why this now makes things feel a bit weird in general.
So when he got banned, it looked extreme instead of reasonable. Because we didn't have all the facts, and that completely changed the shape of what we saw. And when his posts all got disappeared at the same time, it looked EXTRA extreme, again because we were completely in the dark about literally everything about the situation. On top of that, this happened right after the forum got bought out by another company, and while we've been assured that this wouldn't result in changes... that's kind of the standard party line whenever there's a buyout in any industry. It's nice, but it's often not accurate, so people naturally learn to take it with a "we'll see" attitude.
So secrecy + circumstances + bad timing made what was internally an ordinary and reasonable mod action look like something much more sketchy from the outside.
At the very least, you shouldn't be insulted because we didn't even know if this was you we were discussing. Everything was up in the air pending mod explanation, and since everything had been done conspicuously silently up to that point, it was not unreasonable to expect we wouldn't get one.
I stand by much of what I said in that thread, even though the situation has now been clarified, because I think it still applies. Redacting problems and deliberately acting silently makes it impossible for people to tell if the mods are acting fairly, which in turn makes "if you don't like it, leave" style arguments meaningless.
This isn't political of any "wing". If you hide everything, people have literally no other option but to draw their own conclusions from whatever little they have. You cannot get mad at people for drawing the wrong conclusion if you refuse to contribute towards any conclusion. You can hold it against them if they refuse to change their conclusions after you clarify, but to come out swinging at people you've actively denied any insight up to that point is intellectually dishonest.
This is not an attack, or an insult. It is a plea for understanding.
-
The above is me "getting things off my chest" after taking a week off from the forum. I apologize if it's long winded, or of it retreads stuff that's been said by others too much.
TLDR:
I don't take issue with the decisions mods have made as far as banning, deleting etc. so far as I am aware of them. Only with the lack of communication, and with what appears to be an emotion-driven blindness regarding the predictable results of said lack of communication.
I've never run afoul of the mods myself, and have no evidence that they've used their power badly in the past. However the latter is not a reliable judgement if use of power is hidden/redacted, and the willingness to take preemptive offense and hyperbolically misrepresent interactions to retroactively justify said offence does establish a mechanism for bad decisions.
-
Instead of getting offended and trying to reframe peoples concerns as weird quasi-political extremist conspiracy theories
What are you talking about?
You say repeatedly that the moderators shouldn't be personally offended, feel insulted, or try to make this incident into a political thing - like this is down to the moderators!
Did you actually read what the OP said?
commercial-oriented right-wing fanboys are a world phenomena in all areas of human activity nowadays... Sad, but true... :( So the "we're closed to all dialog for reason of the common good" are harsh words being said worldwide, not only here at our dear LAF.
It was the OP who ridiculously brought politics into it. I'm not surprised that a couple of my fellow moderators took personal offence at that label seemingly being applied to them.
-
The above is me "getting things off my chest" after taking a week off from the forum. I apologize if it's long winded, or of it retreads stuff that's been said by others too much.
TLDR:
I don't take issue with the decisions mods have made as far as banning, deleting etc. so far as I am aware of them. Only with the lack of communication, and with what appears to be an emotion-driven blindness regarding the predictable results of said lack of communication.
I've never run afoul of the mods myself, and have no evidence that they've used their power badly in the past. However the latter is not a reliable judgement if use of power is hidden/redacted, and the willingness to take preemptive offense and hyperbolically misrepresent interactions to retroactively justify said offence does establish a mechanism for bad decisions.
I condense from what you write that you want more transparency and communication from the owner/admin/moderator team. I am not going to reiterate what has already been said several times in the thread above (which to my eye already addresses most of your concerns). I will state that I would not stay on as a moderator if I had to embarrass a (former) member more than what is absolutely unavoidable. I suggest that your concern about transparency is perhaps subordinate to a that of concerned members wishes. Quite honestly, I do not think most members do give a hoot about this whole business. They should not have to because it is discussions which are peripheral to the wargaming hobby which leads to tedious things like this.
-
(http://naughteesclothing.co.uk/ekmps/shops/naughtees/images/i-am-spartacus-t-shirt-14853-p[ekm]270x131[ekm].jpg)
But please keep that to yourself.....
-
We really don't want to go through all this again, given that all positions have been made abundantly clear and this cyclic discussion is not going to yield anything that hasn't already been said.
I think that under these circumstances, it will be better to consider this matter closed.