Living in Interesting Times

[Antonio J Carrasco]

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.

[Hammers]

...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. 

[Blackwolf]

I’m aghast, Guy, since I cannot recall any such spat an since I consider you a bery valued contributors to this community. 

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

Just be decent to one another chaps.

[FramFramson]

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.

[Elk101]

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.

[FramFramson]

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.

[FramFramson]

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.

[nicknorthstar]

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.

[Cubs]

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.

[Westfalia Chris]

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.

[Arlequín]

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.

[cdm]

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.

[Hammers]

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.

[FramFramson]

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.

[FramFramson]

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).