Like it.
Retrieving the G40 thread: Cost structure (and naval units). The flaw.
-
@Imperious:
OK the problem is mostly fixed. The OP at this time can only lock but not remove topics. Never again can this crap happen.
Djensen will remove the lock topic button soon and get us those badges “customizer”
Why can’t we keep the lock topic option?
-
Because we want people to participate, not have some OP block threads and close them down. That does not promote posting and participation here.
Only moderators should be able to lock threads, not posters.
On the issue of forum space, Djensen is going with some new software soon that will fix that.
What if someone new posts a question that has already been answered frequently and finds the answer? This person can no longer delete the topic.
Moderator does this if requested, or op just leaves his post.
What if you designed a variant or house rule and decided to improve that variant or house rule and wanted to delete the old version? You can still edit your own posts… nothing changed
What about a topic title that may have a typo or some other problem that the OP may wish to correct? This might also apply to polls done incorrectly or perhaps an option intended to be included but overlooked.
OP can always edit and fix that, or Moderator
I understand many of the points for not deleting topics but I see this change in the forum posibly having some less desirable consequences that courtesy and self-policing could have easily remedied.
It is much better now it works for everyone and does not allow “Jr. Moderators”
-
Well I suppose what’s done is done. Unfortunate IMO. I personally still see some potential problems, some which I have not mentioned, as well as concerns I hope DJensen is taking into account.
I suppose Mr. Jensen would know the best, I trust his judgement. We may have some very busy moderators in the future.
-
I had hoped there might be a way to allow specific forums to still have the function–play by email/forum for example. But even there it might have been wise to have a moderator approve deletion. (Are there tournaments that allowing OP deletion might have impacted?)
I’m not planning to test it, but I suppose if you duplicate post a thread you can still shut down an empty thread by doing a remove on your own post. And folks can still delete their own individual posts. They simply are not allowed to “unilaterally” delete the content of others. And that is a good thing.
-
@Red:
I had hoped there might be a way to allow specific forums to still have the function–play by email/forum for example. � But even there it might have been wise to have a moderator approve deletion. � (Are there tournaments that allowing OP deletion might have impacted?)
I’m not planning to test it, but I suppose if you duplicate post a thread you can still shut down an empty thread by doing a remove on your own post. � And folks can still delete their own individual posts. � They simply are not allowed to “unilaterally” delete the content of others. � And that is a good thing.
The problem is that the cost structure thread was essentially created almost as a sub-thread for the G40 Enhanced project to debate naval units. It in and of itself was almost a temporary thread. I believe the overall goal was to create a set of house rules in a similar formula as the Revised Enhanced house rules set.
The naval cost structure thread was posted in the G40 forum section to attract attention to the project as well as to not overcrowd the original G40e thread.
All that aside, the cost structure thread is gone for what ever reason one’s point of view was, resulting in the loss of the option for one to delete thier own topics which will have consequences both positive and negative. I however believe it was unecessary and could have been resolved in other less impactfull ways.
Additionally this disagreement will be posted for all to read until it removed by a moderator rather than letting all involved “bury the hatchet” , shake hands, and simply have a gentleman’s agreement to agree to disagree.
Now we will have to request the assistance of a moderator to adjust simple errors or remove something unwanted or unneeded.
-
All that aside, the cost structure thread is gone for what ever reason one’s point of view was, resulting in the loss of the option for one to delete thier own topics which will have consequences both positive and negative. I however believe it was unecessary and could have been resolved in other less impactfull ways.
Additionally this disagreement will be posted for all to read until it removed by a moderator rather than letting all involved “bury the hatchet” , shake hands, and simply have a gentleman’s agreement to agree to disagree.
Now we will have to request the assistance of a moderator to adjust simple errors or remove something unwanted or unneeded.
Your concern should be addressed to the person who abused this feature in the first place and made it clear that a fix was required.
-
@Red:
All that aside, the cost structure thread is gone for what ever reason one’s point of view was, resulting in the loss of the option for one to delete thier own topics which will have consequences both positive and negative. I however believe it was unecessary and could have been resolved in other less impactfull ways.
Additionally this disagreement will be posted for all to read until it removed by a moderator rather than letting all involved “bury the hatchet” , shake hands, and simply have a gentleman’s agreement to agree to disagree.
Now we will have to request the assistance of a moderator to adjust simple errors or remove something unwanted or unneeded.
Your concern should be addressed to the person who abused this feature in the first place and made it clear that a fix was required.
And you could’ve been satisfied with the fact that historical and mathematical figures were sound.
You could have let the argument go and let Uncrustable continue with his project.You could have read the entire thread and realized it was for a set of house rules and not an official ruling from Larry Harris or Krieghund.
You could have simply let the whole argument go and realize that Uncrustable is one person on this forum.
Instead you wanted to prove you “BEAT” Uncrustable in debate and wanted proof of it. He deleted the thread, you got pissed and now the rest of us have to suffer.
The thread you posted in the G40 forum is nothing but venom because you didn’t get to prove you won. Now you took away the option to delete threads which will cause problems.
Your rivalry with Uncrustable and desire to “prove” you are right has caused a major change to this forum. A bad one. If you think he’s snarky he is, as well as several other members.
The funny thing is that I agreed with much of your argument in the Naval Cost thread, and now because you’re pissed at not being able to tell Uncrustable “what for” in a public forum, you have essentially revamped the forum because he deleted HIS OWN THREAD!
As far as I’m concerned this is a total loss to the community over a pissing contest.
This is bad for the forum and serious consequences will result from this all to prove you “beat” another forum member.
-
And you could’ve been satisfied with the fact that historical and mathematical figures were sound.
You could have let the argument go and let Uncrustable continue with his project.You could have read the entire thread and realized it was for a set of house rules and not an official ruling from Larry Harris or Krieghund.
Uncrustables math wasn’t entirely sound and it sure as heck wasn’t historical.
It also wasn’t posted in house rules. Otherwise I wouldn’t have bothered with it. I had as much right to post in it as anyone else.
I focused on the part that applied to G40 and interested me…wow, just like any other forum user might be expected to do…
You could have simply let the whole argument go and realize that Uncrustable is one person on this forum.
Why let it go when it was so obviously flawed? If one sees a flaw (or a problem with forum architecture) why should they just ignore it?
Instead you wanted to prove you “BEAT” Uncrustable in debate and wanted proof of it. He deleted the thread, you got pissed and now the rest of us have to suffer.
Your only suffering appears to be the inability to delete the posts of those who dare to disagree with you.
Now you took away the option to delete threads which will cause problems.
The function itself already caused problems, and it is the only forum I’ve ever noticed this function available on (going back to the 90’s.) I’ve seen moderators blow away threads, but not users.
Actually, I posted to find out WTH had happened and why I couldn’t find ANY of the posts made in the thread. I didn’t really care much that the thread itself was gone. But the work in it should have been accessible for future use. When I was PM’ed for information that I could no longer point to in trying to retrieve former posts of MINE, I decided to post. Excuse the heck of me for asking why some obnoxious user was allowed to delete MY posts as well as others I was talking with.
Your rivalry with Uncrustable and desire to “prove” you are right has caused a major change to this forum. A bad one. If you think he’s snarky he is, as well as several other members.
I don’t really care who Uncrustable is, that’s the extent of the rivalry. I concur with MrRoboto’s assessment of him 100%. I had seen a few other posts from Uncrustable and hesitated before posting in the thread. My concerns were confirmed.
Snark is okay, particularly when it hits the mark, but logic failures should be challenged.
The funny thing is that I agreed with much of your argument in the Naval Cost thread, and now because you’re pissed at not being able to tell Uncrustable “what for” in a public forum, you have essentially revamped the forum because he deleted HIS OWN THREAD!
Dude! You don’t OWN a thread you created in another’s forum. If you host your own forum you can own it.
-
I wasn’t talking about Uncrustable’s data. I was talking about your math and historical data being sound.
If you read through the G40e thread you must have missed something then. Because others posted stats for things like HBG units and historical aspects involving unit stats. Uncrustable spacifically stated many times that was not what he was looking to introduce into his G40e project.
As for letting things go. Yes you could have walked away and simply let Uncrustable delete his thread. Instead you wanted to be able to ahow you won an arguement.
I don’t delete posts just because somone disagrees with me. I simply stated I have deleted them before for various reasons other than throwing some tantrum because someone disagreed with me.
As for the thread asking why Uncrustable deleted a thread. You canmake whatever thread you want but we can all reasonably surmise this is not some purely educational endevor.
No I don’t own a thread but authorship does allow for some creative control.
-
At least a member would warn the thread participants if they planned to delete a thread, giving someone time to copy and paste any long posts. Do you think a moderator would give any warning if they wanted to delete something?
-
@Imperious:
Because we want people to participate, not have some OP block threads and close them down. That does not promote posting and participation here.
I agree all along.
No one will need have second thoughts before taking time to write a lengthy post on a thread or another.The problem is that the cost structure thread was essentially created almost as a sub-thread for the G40 Enhanced project to debate naval units. It in and of itself was almost a temporary thread. I believe the overall goal was to create a set of house rules in a similar formula as the Revised Enhanced house rules set.
The naval cost structure thread was posted in the G40 forum section to attract attention to the project as well as to not overcrowd the original G40e thread.
Since it was a sub-thread for G40e, and there was no distinctive sign on this thread as temporary, I thought it was a place to discuss and argue to a wider extent of perspective the value of the cost structure than if I was on the G40e thread.
If it is not clearly said, it is hard to guess the intent of the Original Poster, especially when the thread evolves to deny some elements of the initial post.
Now we will have to request the assistance of a moderator to adjust simple errors or remove something unwanted or unneeded.
OP is not powerless, there is still some indirect ways to adjust errors, revised or remove unwanted posts:
The OP can erase the content of his initial post (and change the title) and let a warning about all the rest (or erase all of his others posts),
the OP can ask other people to stop writing and announce that the thread will be erase sooner or later (while asking a mod to erase it, as many ask to remove a thread to another forum),
the OP can ask other people to erased/moved all their posts, (members of good will, will agree),
even if the hijack is debatable, it can still be ask to those members to remove or erase their posts,
then, after all this, the button “Report to moderator” is still there (for all kind of hijacking).
-
Baron,
For the most part you seem to be a nice guy and a good forum member. So while I understand why you feel the way you do about this subject, I respectfully disagree with your POV.
On the first quote: I believe you try to practice that line of thought.
The OP is not completely powerless I agree and there are various ways to edit postings. However a measure of freedom has been taken away that could have been self-regulated. It is now enforced. Unfortunately this whole issue will hang around a lot longer in part due to that enforcement.
As for the actual thread that was removed it seemed pretty clear that it was part of G40E. I didn’t really participate in that thread other than to observe. I think maybe some people didn’t read the whole thread and simply came in at the end, I don’t know but it was pretty clear to me if not stated implicitly.
Personally I would’ve not removed the thread. However Uncrustable did have the right to do so by the old forum rules and I supported his right to do so. Now that it’s changed, it’s a non-issue. He even apologized for it, he didn’t have to but he did.
The escalation of this whole subject is having and will make an impact on the morale of the board which I still believe in un-necessary.
It’s already been done and there’s really nothing to be done about it. Hopefully everybody gets along and stuff like this doesn’t happen again.
-
OP is not powerless, there is still some indirect ways to adjust errors, revised or remove unwanted posts:
The OP can erase the content of his initial post (and change the title) and let a warning about all the rest (or erase all of his others posts),
the OP can ask other people to stop writing and announce that the thread will be erase sooner or later (while asking a mod to erase it, as many ask to remove a thread to another forum),
the OP can ask other people to erased/moved all their posts, (members of good will, will agree),
even if the hijack is debatable, it can still be ask to those members to remove or erase their posts,
The OP can only edit HIS OWN POSTS. Moderators don’t erase threads unless people are name calling. Anybody can ask anything, most people won’t comply unless a substantive reason.
-
@Imperious:
The OP can only edit HIS OWN POSTS. Moderators don’t erase threads unless people are name calling. Anybody can ask anything, most people won’t comply unless a substantive reason.
Are you telling me that moderators never erase some fraudulent or derailing posts when the OP ask for it (on good reason)?
That the only reason to erase a post (not talking about whole thread) is insult and name calling?
-
As for the actual thread that was removed it seemed pretty clear that it was part of G40E. I didn’t really participate in that thread other than to observe. I think maybe some people didn’t read the whole thread and simply came in at the end, I don’t know but it was pretty clear to me if not stated implicitly.
Maybe it is because I’m only “6 months” old on this forum, I didn’t see this practice very often (it was only the second time).
It never cross my mind that someone would erase a thread with substantive posts in it.
Maybe I was too naive and innocent member (wrongly applying general principals of ethics in a technical field with his own specific rules) which should have read more about politics of forum and better watch out about this “feature”.I felt like said the proverb: “a scalded cat fears cold water”.
Time will tell how it is a burden to moderators, and if it has gone too far impacting the editorial freedom of thread author.
If it is still an issue, I’m sure it will be discuss and some solutions can be found to balance the pendulum.
-
Are you telling me that moderators never erase some fraudulent or derailing posts when the OP ask for it (on good reason)?
That the only reason to erase a post (not talking about whole thread) is insult and name calling?
Yes they do and should move these threads to Moderation ( not erase) Djensen makes the decision or directs the Moderator to edit language that is against the rules.
Insults and name calling are generally not aloud on these forums. You can attack points made by a poster, but not the poster.
-
Thanks for explanations IL.
Suggested Topics
