a general consensus

[Lord Vercingetorix]

I am sorry if the thread I posted earlier (WW II idaes for an army) offended some people. That was not my intention. I also have had my grandfather storm Normady beach and my Great-Grandfather is right from Germany. I just like the background. I didn't say anything about swasticas, i put symbols. Didn't mention any names. But I got reply's from others that it was unfair to have the topic locked up. And I know what the duty of the mods are. But it seems to me that all it takes is just one mod to close down a topic which doesn't seem right. It should be a general consensious of most of the mods. One mod could not like a person or not like a certain topic which isn't fair to the rest of the forum. Opinions are like buttholes, everyone has one. Just because one person doesn't like a certain topic, does that person have the right to say that others are not allowed to have a say in the topic?
This is an open forum where people are allowed or should be allowed:
to get together and have fun with each other
get ideas from others
just be able to talk to others about their hobby
and not have to worry about one person saying what you can and can not talk about on an open forum. I do see that if someone does point out a certain member and says something negative about them or swears than there should be that shut down, but come on no swearing in my topic and I didn't say something bad about another member. I have a feeling that this forum will probably be locked up also, but at least I got a chance to say what others and myself are feeling about the fact that it isn't right for one person to say no to a topic, it should be a vote by the mods. Democracy is a good thing at times. So lets here it for a vote for shutting down threads instead of just one person who doesn't like the thread to be able to shut it down.

[Rork]

Rule #1 of forums: this ain't a democracy.

Secondly, it would be impractical. Mods are spread across time zones and countries (Europe and North America, primarily), so waiting for everyone to get online and vote would take its time.

Mods are charged to do what they think is best. We don't always get things right, and people might not always like our decisions. But if we have to wait around for a quorum, the thread could escalate and result in people suffering even harsher discipline.

The basis of Team Mod is that everyone can rely on someone else on the team to do the right thing. We're appointed and appoint mods on the basis that we trust their decisions and would do the same (or similar) when something needs to be moderated.

The place would grind to a halt, otherwise.

[Tekore]

Originally Posted by Rork

Rule #1 of forums: this ain't a democracy.

Secondly, it would be impractical. Mods are spread across time zones and countries (Europe and North America, primarily), so waiting for everyone to get online and vote would take its time.

Mods are charged to do what they think is best. We don't always get things right, and people might not always like our decisions. But if we have to wait around for a quorum, the thread could escalate and result in people suffering even harsher discipline.

The basis of Team Mod is that everyone can rely on someone else on the team to do the right thing. We're appointed and appoint mods on the basis that we trust their decisions and would do the same (or similar) when something needs to be moderated.

The place would grind to a halt, otherwise.

Having had ample opportunities to see "democracy" at work in online communities, I wholeheartedly agree with Rork.

Tekore

[Lord Vercingetorix]

"It should be a general consensious of most of the mods." This is what I put, key word being most, not all. I know that there are more than one mod per time zone and area. So just ask each other. Just because YOU don't like a topic doesn't mean that others dislike it. I didn't even get a chance to get ideas on my topic. like color schemes, how to set up squads. So just go ahead and close this one down also, as we know that mods will vote yes and suck ups also, while the normal every day civilian will vote no.

[Caluin]

We know you didn't mean to offend anyone. People that do have very short stays at LO. You'll note that when I locked your thread, I gave you a lengthy answer to help answer your questions, rather than just a blanket "Thread locked" comment.

Rork summed everything up nicely, but I'd like to elaborate just a little bit. Mods are given a certain measure of responsibility so that they can deal with things in a fair, measured manner. If a mod is incapable of this, then they're replaced by someone who can. We choose our staff members very carefully because of this.

This is a necessity. If we sit around and wait, things can quickly spiral out of control. I'll give you a very real example. Five days before you posted your thread, someone else had a question about modelling an army based off of Rommel. I gave you the link once already. What you can't see if the very inflammatory post left for the topic creator for asking a simple question.

Originally Posted by The Question

What is possibly offencive about a field marshal who ignored to orders to kill capured people and tried to assinate one of the most hated men in history?

Originally Posted by The Inflammatory Answer

...His personal allegience to Hitler is impertinent; he was a nationalist, a fascist, and a murderer, and you are not only a complete moron, but a wretchedly ignorant little child.

To the OP, I, for one, would curb-stomp your army and then probably you if I ever saw you field such an abomination to human dignity; I'd also curb-stomp any moron dumb enough to attempt to argue that emulating one of the most monstrous and infamous mass-murderers isn't offensive.

I cut out a few things from the answer and only quoted the important stuff. Do you know why that happened? Because I let the thread stay open. Because, instead of performing my duty and shutting the thread down, I entertained the notion that people could talk about a sensitive subject without resorting to stupid remarks, such as the ones quoted. Imagine how quickly that would've degenerated had I been forced to wait for a majority opinion on the matter.

Ultimately, it comes down to this. The staff members are chosen to protect the interests of everyone on the board. Obviously, we can't make everyone happy all the time, so we do the best we can. If shutting down one thread and potentially upsetting the topic creator saves the feelings of others who look at the thread and post crap like what I've quoted, then I consider it a job well done. The mod team on LO is a group of excellent people, and though we make mistakes from time to time, we do the best we can to ensure that the forum is a safe, fun environment for everyone.

[Rork]

Originally Posted by Lord Vercingetorix

Just because YOU don't like a topic doesn't mean that others dislike it. I didn't even get a chance to get ideas on my topic. like color schemes, how to set up squads.

It's not about what we dislike. There are threads that pass through the rules forum that I'd dearly love to scream at and shut down, but I don't. I may find some of the arguments illogical and fatuous, but such things aren't particularly threatening (unless someone gets insulting). Moderators have to be objective and do what is best for the forum in general.

WWII threads, particularly those relating to the German military, sit on a knife-edge. If people are willing to be utterly accurate in their depiction of specific colour schemes and organisation, then fair play to them. But it is an emotive issue and we have to be wary thread 'drift' - A thread may start with good intentions, but all it takes is "My father was executed by the Nazis" and the whole thing nosedives (Just get a book on the wehrmacht, it's safer that way).

Moderators also have to be able to prevent fires, not just put them out. The intentions of most thread starters are noble, even when it comes to historically accurate armies (which are a little out of place in the 41st millenium, but hey), but one other random person with either history or a juvenile attitude can wreck an 'honest' thread.

As much as we'd like to please all the people all of the time, we can't. We have to use our experience to say what is good and what isn't, and most mods (on any forum) will tell you that nearly any thread relating to Nazi Germany quite often ends up in disaster since some of their formations committed horrendous crimes. You have to be so careful when not talking directly about WWII (and even then there's a fine line that can be crossed).

[Tekore]

Originally Posted by Lord Vercingetorix

So just go ahead and close this one down also, as we know that mods will vote yes and suck ups also, while the normal every day civilian will vote no.

I wasn't really going with the sucking up thing, as much as I've been a moderator on several other, unrelated forums, and I think that your idea is completely untenable, as leaving potentially turbulent threads open while the mods debate the thread and vote on it leads to more turbulence and violence than it is ever worth. I might think that the mods' decisions on LO are great at times, or not great, but I'm not going to vote to chain them up and not let them do their job without hours of constraints. I'm not voting against you to suck up, I'm voting against you because I feel you are incredibly wrong. Best of luck.

Tekore

[BrotherAzriel]

It seems that this very topic (i mean historical people) comes up ofton, its not exactly wise to portray people like that in a friendly game, where kids ofton play.

i can see how your upset at the topic being closed but it was a move made to prevent YOU from becomeing the victim of small minded people who would just get angry quickly and attack you, no one said you were in the wrong and no one told you off spesificly, if you really want more advice on the topic that badly, simply look around for some IG players, send them a PM asking "do you mind if i ask you..." and there you go, problem solved.

[ArchonFarseerGuy]

Looking at the thread, I can see that you didn't mean to offend anyone, but what the Nazis did was so horrific thar people will inevitably be offended by hinting at them. If you want WWII figures, then I'd recommend FoW. THe figures are cheaper and better detailed for their size, the rules are simpler, and the gamers are people that have an interest in WWII- the military side of it- so you should find people with a common interest.

I recall in the Rules Forum Phobos mentioning that this isn't a democracy. I guess you can imagine Blackhat acting as a wondering nomad. He decided to settle and establish this site- like a country in which he is in charge. Gradually more and more people flocked here to be part of this country (still ruled by Blackhat), but he couldn't keep order amongst everyone, so he appointed Mods (acting as Magistrates). They can do whatever they see fit (they don't get selected for birth positions or anything, they know what they're doing), just like Magistrates. But, like Magistrates, they make mistakes- like us humans do- and the best we can do is just take what's happened in our stride.

A while back, Wayne Barnes (referee) ruled taht a forward pass was legit. As a result of that, the ABs lost the game. Rugby is like a religion over here, and people were pissed off at him. Sites were formed, like "Lets go kill the Ref", and people made badges that said "Wayne Barnes is a w@nker". As you can tell, NZ isn't known for being good losers. You can react like that, or you can say "Oh well, it was a mistake. There's always next time".

Finally, calling tekore a suckup isn't the best way to go about it either.

-AFG

[Warrior47]

Hey, just wanted to address one part of you're post that seemed to get passed over.

Originally Posted by Lord Vercingetorix

"It should be a general consensious of most of the mods."

One thing that you may or may not know is that the mods have a separate forum where they specificly discuss things like problem members and locked threads (atleast, from what I've been told). In almost 3 years on this forum, I can remember several threads that have been reopened after mods have had a little while to discuss it and I have seen some that were closed later though they were origionally deemed okay. If a thread is closed and doesn't bring attention like this, it pretty much means that it is the consensus of the mods that that thread was okay to close, so it's not like they are able to just gun some one down for no reason or do whatever they want.

Cheers