Jump to content

Alvis 3.1

Super Mods
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    214

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Alvis 3.1

    F-35 news roundup

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Canadian modifications the the F-35, eh?:
    Timmies cup holder in cockpit.
    Hockey Night in Canada streaming service antennas.
    Deployable spotlight mounted on Freezing Wingman drone.
    Hockey gear bag luggage pods.

    Onboard voice module set to say "Zed" instead of "Zee" (Already a feature on UK and Australian F-35s)

    Beer cooler mounted where the lift fan would be in the "B" model.
    Poutine warmer mounted in same bay.

     

    Alvis 3.1

    SBARC... Are you okay...

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    21 minutes ago, GW8345 said:

    Well, they are known for their inconsistent operations, my guess it is due to their questionable wiring and poor standards of quality.

    See: -Lucas, Prince of Darkness.
    -Lucas Three Position Switch: Dim/Flicker/Off
    -Triumph Oil Indicator: That black line on the road trailing behind the car
    -Lucas= Loose Unsoldered Connections and Splices

     

     

    SBARC... Are you okay...

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    9 hours ago, GW8345 said:

     

     

    I guess I can relate a little about when it comes to subjective observations,some may find old British cars to be sophisticated and exude intelligence but I find them to be foolish and over-rated. But, then again, everything is subjective isn't it.

     

     

    Au contraire, mon frère, British cars are the MOST intelligence vehicles ever built.

    They know before you do when you're done driving for the day.

    SBARC... Are you okay...

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Alvis 3.1

    4 minutes ago, GW8345 said:

    Exactly what rule is being broken that would result in threads like this being locked down?

     

    BTW, nice avatar, who's the troll again?

    It's self explanatory. Really. Read it again.
     

    SBARC... Are you okay...

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    44 minutes ago, andyf117 said:

    Sadly, it's when theads deteriorate into members taking potshots at each other and/or third parties - like this one has done - that others decide that they want no part of it, and quietly drift away, sometimes never to be seen again...

    ....please, guys, just knock it off - such slanging matches don't do anyone or anything any favours...

    Exactly.
    This is why threads get locked.
     

    SBARC... Are you okay...

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    56 minutes ago, GW8345 said:

    Talk about projection, you keep painting me as some kind of martyr, do you even know what that word means?

     

    Here, let me help you out;

     

     

    I may, MAY, have care a little (a very little) about this site but not enough to suffer or sacrifice one drop of sweat/blood (and now time) for this site. You seem to think that anyone who complains about the way this site is ran is a martyr and that when people leave they storm off in a huff, talk about projection.

     

    You kept twisting what I write to match your perception, claiming I'm clueless and embellishing what I wrote, that's why I gave up trying to discuss anything with you. I didn't surrender, I stopped rolling around with the pigs.

     

    I will give what you wrote all the consideration it deserves. I feel this conversation is not going anywhere, it’s clear that you are not equipped to understand any point I make so continue to express them would be pointless. I hope your day is as pleasant as our conversation has been.

    Any time you whine that you are sure to be blocked, shut down or ignored, you are acting like a martyr. Over and over. Pretty much every post you've done here ends with you claiming nobody will listen to you and the conversation is going nowhere. You act like you are being persecuted. 

    Have you been blocked? Had the thread closed? Nope.
    But please keep driving nails into your own hands and claiming people are being mean to you. They aren't.

    Complaining about how the site is run isn't being a martyr. Pretending that complaining is persecuted is being a martyr.


    You project more than a PowerPoint presentation. Claiming to know what I think? Making up fictional scenarios then getting mad about them? That's somewhere between laughable and concerning.

     

    For there to be a discussion of how things might change in any situation, there needs to be some back and forth dialogue. When one side throws up their hands and claims they aren't being listened to and just might as well quit they aren't really trying to act in good faith. 
    "My guess the above will either be deleted by a mod and I'll get banned"
     "but I see nothing will change so it would be pointless to continue."

    It's almost as if you aren't really wanting to have any kind of discussion. 



    Please show me where I have embellished what you wrote. I've shown actual quotes of you making self-immolation statements. As for saying you are clueless, well, you are. You make assumptions about how things are done or decided without any actual knowledge of how they have been done to somebody who was actually involved, or about the personal life of Steve. Gee, what does that sound like? It sounds exactly like the complaint you made about experts not wanting to post here because "textperts" would counter their experience. Well, that's what happens when you have your cranial structure firmly ensconced in the posterior cavity on a subject you know nothing about. That's also called making my points for me. Thank you. 

    You aren't an expert on how things have run at ARC. You're somebody whose axe has been ground down to a blunt nub from years of unhappiness. (That's a metaphor, I'm not saying you have an actual axe that's been ground down.)


    And as somebody who deliberately chose to dump a bunch of unsubstantiated claims, personal attacks and baseless suppositions in a thread started (and titled) over a concern about the well being of a person shows that any accusations of people here being swine is best directed back at who just made that claim. 

    Scalemates.com issue?

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    18 minutes ago, ReccePhreak said:

    I tried going straight in to https://www.scalemates.com/, and get the same error messages on  3 different computers. 2 with Chrome browser and 1 with Microsoft Edge. 

    I don't have a Mac or iPad to check them.

    I used that link on Chrome just now and it's working ok for me.

    SBARC... Are you okay...

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    7 hours ago, karl h said:

    Jennings migrated over to LSP and we never had a problem with him or his strong opinions. only interesting content

    guess he learned where to stop

    The reality is that not everybody is a good fit on every site. I'm glad he's contributing to the world of modelling knowledge. He's an awesome source of information!

    SBARC... Are you okay...

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    6 hours ago, 11bee said:

      

    The truly ironic thing is that this thread is probably the most viewed and participated thread on ARC in the last few years.  It's certainly one of the most entertaining (which inevitably means it's heading for the lock).

     

     

     

    Nope.
    Participation and entertaining do not equate lockdowns.
    BTW, was that your way of posting "IBTL"?
    :P

    SBARC... Are you okay...

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    9 hours ago, GW8345 said:

    If you think this site is running fine and there's no room for improvement then I guess there is nothing left for us to discuss. We can go on for days discussing this topic but I see nothing will change so it would be pointless to continue.

    Seriously dude, the nail holes in your palms haven't healed over from your last time. 
    Projection, projection, projection. Yeesh.
    Everything has room for improvement, even your attitude, but since you end pretty much every commentary with a surrender declaration, well maybe you should wave nice to the cameras and give General MacArthur a big ole smooch and call it a day then.

    SBARC... Are you okay...

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Alvis 3.1

    Quote

    Why would I drag them into this? I'm sure they don't want to be any part of so that is why I didn't name them.

    You're the one who made an accusation without evidence, except for hearsay. Sorry, right off the bat that hurts any chance you might have had for "fair and impartial" actions. But hey, at least I am trying. 

     

     

    Quote

    Bamford has also stated (years ago) that he was using this site to supplement his income, that he was actually making money off this site and using it to fund his house/life style.

     

    And again, he's stated many times that he's needed extra funds to keep the site up and running. Your bias against Steve seems to have caused some memory problems.

     

     

    Quote

    If that's the case why is he working three jobs? He's not working those jobs because he loves them, he's working them because he even said that the pandemic took a toll on his finances and that he now has to dig himself out of a hole. He's not working those three jobs because he loves the work, he working three jobs to make money.

     

    I assume you don't build models as a source of income? Or play golf? Or watch TV? Or play D&D? Or whatever you might call a hobby? If you had the slightest clue what ARC brings in for revenue, you'd know Steve didn't do it for the money. Honestly I don't recall a time where it was generating enough income to fully fund it, let alone contribute to Steve's luxurious lifestyle of the Rich and Famous.

     

     

    Quote

    I don't think I was vague at all when I said this site needs fair and even handed moderation. This site is known for it's favoritism and hypocritical moderation (and no, don't ask me for examples, I'm not about to go digging through old posts just to prove what I've seen). How is saying that this site needs fair and even handed moderation vague, I don't think I could have spelled it out any more clearly.

     

    Those kinds of situations (from my time here, been a member off/on for 15 years) are very rare, most of the biased moderation happens right here in the General Discussion forum and didn't involve experts. I've yet to see an expert say they don't like what someone has said and storm off.

     

     

    Sorry, but "fair and even handed" IS a generalisation. What's fair to you makes another mad. Put up a model of an aircraft from one side of a modern conflict and suddenly there's a bunch of people from the other side upset about it. In the end you're only going to appease one side. That's the fun nature of moderating international forums. 


    As for "experts storming off" I've can think of two right off the top of my head. One made a sweeping generalisation about something relating to aircraft painting, and when shown evidence he was wrong, cleared off his account. He isn't alone. It happens, and just because you claim to have not seen it, it doesn't mean it's a Sasquatch. (Bigfoot for some)


     

    Quote

    I ask because I would think if someone is busting their butt working 3 jobs, six days a week (he posted that a while back) I would think that person would ask their significant other to not go out and spend money on luxury items until they have financial stability. If he's so busy busting his rear earning money why is his wife out blowing money on luxury things? After all, the reason why he can't support this site is because he has to work so hard in order to get his financial house back in order

     

    I dunno man. I asked a couple guys with wives that question and they laughed their butts off.

     

     

    Quote

    Yep, I get that, but if you are hurting for money would you pay someone to cut your lawn or would you do it yourself and save that money?

     

    Let's do some math. What do you pay a kid to mow your lawn? $20.00? $40.00? (I really don't know, I have a tiny bit of boulevard to mow so it takes like 5 minutes twice a year)
    So now what do you make an hour? $20.00? $40.00? And the time you aren't at work going to/from the house to mow the lawn? Assuming Boss #2 lets you have that time off? Remember that 3 jobs thing?
    It's not hard to see the math supports paying somebody to do things, even when you're run to the wall.
    And as for being concerned who is shooting the videos really comes across as a tad stalkerish.


     

    Quote

    Um, who's trying to be a self martyr here, I was only providing an opinion that is different from all the other love-fest slobbering one's being posted, no martyrdom involved, can you please point to what I wrote that you consider "self martyring statements".

     

    1-My guess the above will either be deleted by a mod and I'll get banned but (to me) it had to be said, there is no money for Mr. Bamford in this site so there is no reason for him to put anymore effort into it. 
    2-     And I will say this in closing, I probably just wasted an hour of my time because I'm sure you and others will comeback and say if I don't like here why don't I leave.
    Repeated complaints aboot "this will assuredly get me bannified" is likely one of the funniest things I see people post in pretty much every forum I'm on.

     

     

    Quote

    Now, let's discuss the direction ARC can take, and how I would improve on the moderation of this site.

     

    First scenario;

    Bamford is gone and he passes to the keys to someone else. This site now becomes that person's private playground and just like under Bamford it's his playground, his rules. If that happens I'm done and out, I can recommend things that would improve the moderation but don't think it's my place to tell someone how to run their playground.

     

    And yet here you are doing just that. Weird.

     

     

     

    Quote

    Second scenario;

    Bamford is gone and the site takes donations from the members to stay open. If this happens the site now becomes a site for the members, ran by the members. There may be a small "board" appointed to do the daily stuff but overall the site belongs to the members. The members should be able to pick who are moderators and I would recommend the following moderator/moderation rules be applied;

     

    1) Get rid of the "no political" rule, this site doesn't really follow it since I've seen several left leaning members make subtle vile swipes about the right and nothing ever happens to them. They're even called out be others asking "what is it about no politics don't you understand". The only time something happens is when a right leaning member offers a counter-point and after a few back and forth post a moderator comes in and shuts down the discussion, even though the discussion has been civil the entire time.

     

    2) A moderator cannot make a comment in a thread then lock it, seen this several times. When a moderator does that they offer their opinion and then locks down the discussion so no one can make a comment/counter-point. To me, that's wrong, if you aren't willing to accept a reply/rebuttal to your opinion then don't post it.

     

    3) No deleting posts unless it is obscene or spam, just because you don't like what someone posted doesn't mean it's wrong (or as the new buzz word in today's day and age "mis-information"). Basically, free speech, I know it's a foreign concept to most here but if you want to make members feel a part of this site then at least allow them to post something without the fear of it being deleted simply because someone else took offense to it. Hell, people take offense to the most trivial things said, doesn't mean what was said is offensive/wrong.

     

    4) If a moderator posts in a thread they can no longer moderate that thread.

     

    5) Have a moderator over-sight board made up of members who have the authority to suspend a moderators powers if it is determine that the moderator is over-stepping their authority.

     

    6) No banning a member unless they post something obscene (pornographic, vulgar, threatening) or are spamming. Posting something that someone thinks is offensive simply because they don't agree with it is not grounds for someone being banned.

     

    7) Post the rules, if you expect members to follow the rules then post them! What happened to the "Rules of the Road" for this site? I remember one of them is that you couldn't call out other members, seems like that one hasn't been enforced for a while.

     

    Okay, more unpacking required here:
    1-"No Politics" really should be called "Don't be an Ass", but that seems to not work either. In case you are not aware, but the moderators don't spend all day hovering over the GD page waiting to pounce. More often than not, it's a "report post" situation that gets our attention (Unless it's somebody who has become a problem in general behaviour, then they just *might* be getting closer attention)
    As for the whole "only right wing people getting picked on" narrative, that's not true. Left leaning people who are jerks have had their threads shut down, posts deleted and yes, even in some cases, booted off the site. As far as I am concerned, if you cannot play nicely, I don't care what your politics are: You're gone. We've given people a LOT of rope, if they chose to use it on themselves, well, that's not on the moderation.

    2-You are assuming the ones commenting are the ones locking. That's not always the case. Also, here's an idea: Maybe they realised that the thread should have been locked after they made their post. Who knows? You don't. 
    Personally, I tend to lock a thread with a snarky comment about people not behaving. I can't recall doing what you claim, but it's not impossible. 
    Honestly, that's not the worst idea, however it does tend to require anyone being a moderator being better than the rest of us, and well, we know how some people don't like thinking moderators think they're better than the rest.
    As for locking a thread, it gets handy when people play fast and loose with the edit function. Claiming you didn't do something that DOES violate the rules is a lot harder to do when it can't be erased. I prefer to have the evidence right there in plain sight, why wouldn't you?

    3-Personally, I tend to agree with this point, although you throwing that whole "free speech" thing in ruins it. You're coming off as elitist and superior to everyone else, and I'm sure that's not what you're trying to do, right? 
    "Free Speech" comes with responsibilities and restrictions, especially on websites. There's LOADS of things you can post here with no fear of it being deleted, especially if you're so adamant it's a site to help modellers. Calling them names and getting a flame war going isn't that. Again, what justifies deleting varies from person to person. I can come up with a lot of scenarios, but you don't seem to want to consider that your point of view doesn't work for everyone. People have left this site because of comments by others, and sorry, but that's not making it a friendly place to post. In fact, you pretty much make my point for me with your comments about people being afraid to post here because of the "textperts". If they are afraid to post here, please show me how having no restrictions on comments makes that better. Claiming people are "afraid" to post here is playing the martyr card again, and it's overused. 

    4-Context matters. If I post in a thread before it goes sideways, I can't moderate it? Doesn't seem right. If I'm involved in the problem, maybe. But define "involved". Saying "Hey there GW98765 knock it off" and then actively moderating later doesn't seem realistic to me.    (Saying "Hey there GW98765 knock it off and then not being able to moderate later doesn't seem realistic to me (edited to correct bad wording)

    5-That's an interesting idea. Given this site has trouble finding people to oversee a group build, it seems unworkable. And what's to stop the oversite board from not being biased? Seems like a level of bureaucracy that's not necessary.

    6-The first 4 reasons are already in play. The last one is rarely used, again, most people who claim to have been banned left of their own volition. Currently, people who repeatedly cause excessive complaints are given options to modify their behaviour. If they continue to be disruptive, they may wind up being removed. Simplistic solutions to problems in the discussion groups have been attempted, and in case you haven't noticed, some people don't play nice online. What can you do?

    7-Honestly, I'm not sure what happened to the "Rules of the Road". If you've been "away" a lot, you may have missed a couple migrations that went poorly, as well as other fun events that happen when you are dealing with online hosting sites. AFIAK the "RotR got lost in a shuffle some time back. Yes, it's a good idea to have them back. Funny thing, even when they were posted people fought the exact wording and acted like latrine lawyers over them. Personally, i would prefer to see them back up. Thanks for the input.

    Steve set up ARC the way it is with no politics, because of things he'd seen happen on RMS. I can't disagree with his stance.

     

     

    Quote

    Third scenario;

     

    Bamford is gone and only those who donate to the site become the "board" and take over ARC. If that's the case I'm out, not worth my time or effort trying to recommend to a select few how they should run their playground.

     

    Okie dokey. 

     

    Quote

    Forth scenario;  *Fourth*

    Bamford returns, then nothing changes and any recommendations will only fall on deaf ears.

    Experience over the years shows that often certain people make comments that either deliberately or accidentally inflame others. As a moderator I try to prevent that from happening, because huge flareups never leads to more people wanting to post. In fact, it tends to do the opposite. As for the whole "ganged up" scenario, that's a general problem on most websites. It's almost like watching a pack of jackals attacking a dinosaur.

     

     

    Quote

    Heck, your post shows me that you are part of the problem because you can't even acknowledge that there might even be the slightest bias in moderation here. Why do people leave, because they think they don't have an equal voice here, not because they storm off in a huff. You want people to come back, stop allowing the little "cliche" here get away with making snide political comments every time they see an opening and causing threads to get locked down. Stop allowing the left leaning members to get away with posting political comments and insulting members, have fair and even handed moderation. And if you don"t see any of what I mentioned happening then you are big part of the problem because as a moderator you are supposed to be unbiased and I see you are not.

     

    Really?
    "If you have serious suggestions on how to moderate the site, please post them. No vague hand wavium ones, real, actual real world ways to improve the moderation. Those of us who've done that job for a very long time would love to see what new ideas you can bring to the table. "Fair and even handed" is vague. It usually boils down to one person wants their point of view left unchallenged, even in the face of facts, and they storm off in a huff. So please tell us exactly how you can appease experts who cannot abide being questioned and others who have new information. " 
     

    Of COURSE there is a bias in moderation, to think otherwise is silly. Is it always biased in the direction you think it is? Not really. Certain people have pushed narratives in the past along specific political lines, and when told to tone it down have become less than cooperative. Are we picking on them for their leanings? No, we're responding to complaints about them. It's no different if you were throwing eggs at the neighbours house and the cops told you to knock it off. Sure, it's funny, but it's annoying the neighbours. But you're being picked on because you voted a certain way?
    No. 

    Who are you referring to to get to "come back"? Like I said before Facebook and the like have sucked a lot of people away from places like ARC. Short of those social media sites shutting down, I don't see many returning from them.

    As for a "clique" ("cliché" means  "a phrase or opinion that is overused and betrays a lack of original thought", like "left leaning members"), some of the people here seem to be the few that are actively using this site. Are you seriously suggesting we throttle the ones actually active here? Is that a "we had to burn down the village to save it" kind of idea, because that's just not going to work. 
    Again, that's "victim mode" in play, and not very well exectuted at that. You claim the lefties gang up and cause threads to get shut down, yet you also claim the righties are singled out for being locked. Well, which is it? If the lefties are causing threads to get locked, then it's their fault.

    And use the "Report post" function instead of whatever else you do. If you have a problem with "left leaning" comments, REPORT THE POST. There is a system in place to deal with problems. If you refuse to use it, you cannot complain about the system being biased.

    I've been a moderator here for, well, maybe 20 years. I've seen a LOT of BS go down, and I've seen a LOT of the same type of person making problems. You know what? Not all of them are from the same side of the political spectrum. Just because your own biases won't let you admit to it doesn't mean it didn't happen. As far as I'm concerned if a person cannot follow the rules, then that's when the moderators get involved. You might want to lump me in with everyone else who is a moderator, that's your prerogative, but you'd be wrong to think we all walk alike and talk alike. I'm pretty sure I sound funny to the guys from overseas. It does show you seem to have a bias yourself.

     

     

    Quote

    Now, you asked for my opinion, there is it, like it or not. And I will say this in closing, I probably just wasted an hour of my time because I'm sure you and others will comeback and say if I don't like here why don't I leave. Well, I basically had, if you noticed I stopped posting and only posted a rebuttal in defense of a manufactures product after it was called (IMO) unrealistic. I then decided to offer an opposing view on this topic and to show not everyone thinks alike. Not everyone here is enthralled with Mr. Bamford, they post here to help out their fellow modeler's and provide information that hardly anyone else can, not because they like the owner.

    Thank you for your input. Honestly you bring up one or two decent points, although your horrendous bias makes them difficult to take seriously. 
    Again, try to not be a martyr. I'm certainly not telling you to leave, just for the entertainment value alone it's worth it for you to stay. 😛
    But seriously, if you want to "improve" ARC, have you? What exactly have YOU contributed to the site lately? Content input is vital to this site, and we're always looking for some useful modelling information. FS numbers, loadouts, colour images, opinions on kits (oh that's a fun area, isn't it? Fan bois sure get wound up on that subject! Tread carefully, but facts matter)
    But no, I didn't notice you stopped posting. Go figure.

    Alvis 3.1

    *resubmitted for clarity

    SBARC... Are you okay...

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Alvis 3.1

    3 hours ago, GW8345 said:

    Ok, let's unpack this a little bit;

     

    Quote

    Why would I drag them into this? I'm sure they don't want to be any part of so that is why I didn't name them.

    You're the one who made an accusation without evidence, except for hearsay. Sorry, right off the bat that hurts any chance you might have had for "fair and impartial" actions. But hey, at least I am trying. 
     

    Quote

    Bamford has also stated (years ago) that he was using this site to supplement his income, that he was actually making money off this site and using it to fund his house/life style.

    And again, he's stated many times that he's needed extra funds to keep the site up and running. Your bias against Steve seems to have caused some memory problems.
     

    Quote

    If that's the case why is he working three jobs? He's not working those jobs because he loves them, he's working them because he even said that the pandemic took a toll on his finances and that he now has to dig himself out of a hole. He's not working those three jobs because he loves the work, he working three jobs to make money.

    I assume you don't build models as a source of income? Or play golf? Or watch TV? Or play D&D? Or whatever you might call a hobby? If you had the slightest clue what ARC brings in for revenue, you'd know Steve didn't do it for the money. Honestly I don't recall a time where it was generating enough income to fully fund it, let alone contribute to Steve's luxurious lifestyle of the Rich and Famous.

     

     

    Quote

     

    I don't think I was vague at all when I said this site needs fair and even handed moderation. This site is known for it's favoritism and hypocritical moderation (and no, don't ask me for examples, I'm not about to go digging through old posts just to prove what I've seen). How is saying that this site needs fair and even handed moderation vague, I don't think I could have spelled it out any more clearly.

     

    Those kinds of situations (from my time here, been a member off/on for 15 years) are very rare, most of the biased moderation happens right here in the General Discussion forum and didn't involve experts. I've yet to see an expert say they don't like what someone has said and storm off.

     

    Sorry, but "fair and even handed" IS a generalisation. What's fair to you makes another mad. Put up a model of an aircraft from one side of a modern conflict and suddenly there's a bunch of people from the other side upset about it. In the end you're only going to appease one side. That's the fun nature of moderating international forums. 


    As for "experts storming off" I've can think of two right off the top of my head. One made a sweeping generalisation about something relating to aircraft painting, and when shown evidence he was wrong, cleared off his account. He isn't alone. It happens, and just because you claim to have not seen it, it doesn't mean it's a Sasquatch. (Bigfoot for some)
     

    Quote

    I ask because I would think if someone is busting their butt working 3 jobs, six days a week (he posted that a while back) I would think that person would ask their significant other to not go out and spend money on luxury items until they have financial stability. If he's so busy busting his rear earning money why is his wife out blowing money on luxury things? After all, the reason why he can't support this site is because he has to work so hard in order to get his financial house back in order

    I dunno man. I asked a couple guys with wives that question and they laughed their butts off.

     

    Quote

    Yep, I get that, but if you are hurting for money would you pay someone to cut your lawn or would you do it yourself and save that money?

    Let's do some math. What do you pay a kid to mow your lawn? $20.00? $40.00? (I really don't know, I have a tiny bit of boulevard to mow so it takes like 5 minutes twice a year)
    So now what do you make an hour? $20.00? $40.00? And the time you aren't at work going to/from the house to mow the lawn? Assuming Boss #2 lets you have that time off? Remember that 3 jobs thing?
    It's not hard to see the math supports paying somebody to do things, even when you're run to the wall.
    And as for being concerned who is shooting the videos really comes across as a tad stalkerish.
     

    Quote

    Um, who's trying to be a self martyr here, I was only providing an opinion that is different from all the other love-fest slobbering one's being posted, no martyrdom involved, can you please point to what I wrote that you consider "self martyring statements".

    1-My guess the above will either be deleted by a mod and I'll get banned but (to me) it had to be said, there is no money for Mr. Bamford in this site so there is no reason for him to put anymore effort into it. 
    2-     And I will say this in closing, I probably just wasted an hour of my time because I'm sure you and others will comeback and say if I don't like here why don't I leave.
    Repeated complaints aboot "this will assuredly get me bannified" is likely one of the funniest things I see people post in pretty much every forum I'm on.
     

     

    Quote
    Quote

     

    Now, let's discuss the direction ARC can take, and how I would improve on the moderation of this site.

     

    First scenario;

    Bamford is gone and he passes to the keys to someone else. This site now becomes that person's private playground and just like under Bamford it's his playground, his rules. If that happens I'm done and out, I can recommend things that would improve the moderation but don't think it's my place to tell someone how to run their playground.

     

    And yet here you are doing just that. Weird.
     

    Quote

     

    Second scenario;

    Bamford is gone and the site takes donations from the members to stay open. If this happens the site now becomes a site for the members, ran by the members. There may be a small "board" appointed to do the daily stuff but overall the site belongs to the members. The members should be able to pick who are moderators and I would recommend the following moderator/moderation rules be applied;

     

    1) Get rid of the "no political" rule, this site doesn't really follow it since I've seen several left leaning members make subtle vile swipes about the right and nothing ever happens to them. They're even called out be others asking "what is it about no politics don't you understand". The only time something happens is when a right leaning member offers a counter-point and after a few back and forth post a moderator comes in and shuts down the discussion, even though the discussion has been civil the entire time.

     

    2) A moderator cannot make a comment in a thread then lock it, seen this several times. When a moderator does that they offer their opinion and then locks down the discussion so no one can make a comment/counter-point. To me, that's wrong, if you aren't willing to accept a reply/rebuttal to your opinion then don't post it.

     

    3) No deleting posts unless it is obscene or spam, just because you don't like what someone posted doesn't mean it's wrong (or as the new buzz word in today's day and age "mis-information"). Basically, free speech, I know it's a foreign concept to most here but if you want to make members feel a part of this site then at least allow them to post something without the fear of it being deleted simply because someone else took offense to it. Hell, people take offense to the most trivial things said, doesn't mean what was said is offensive/wrong.

     

    4) If a moderator posts in a thread they can no longer moderate that thread.

     

    5) Have a moderator over-sight board made up of members who have the authority to suspend a moderators powers if it is determine that the moderator is over-stepping their authority.

     

    6) No banning a member unless they post something obscene (pornographic, vulgar, threatening) or are spamming. Posting something that someone thinks is offensive simply because they don't agree with it is not grounds for someone being banned.

     

    7) Post the rules, if you expect members to follow the rules then post them! What happened to the "Rules of the Road" for this site? I remember one of them is that you couldn't call out other members, seems like that one hasn't been enforced for a while.

     

    Okay, more unpacking required here:
    1-"No Politics" really should be called "Don't be an Ass", but that seems to not work either. In case you are not aware, but the moderators don't spend all day hovering over the GD page waiting to pounce. More often than not, it's a "report post" situation that gets our attention (Unless it's somebody who has become a problem in general behaviour, then they just *might* be getting closer attention)
    As for the whole "only right wing people getting picked on" narrative, that's not true. Left leaning people who are jerks have had their threads shut down, posts deleted and yes, even in some cases, booted off the site. As far as I am concerned, if you cannot play nicely, I don't care what your politics are: You're gone. We've given people a LOT of rope, if they chose to use it on themselves, well, that's not on the moderation.

    2-You are assuming the ones commenting are the ones locking. That's not always the case. Also, here's an idea: Maybe they realised that the thread should have been locked after they made their post. Who knows? You don't. 
    Personally, I tend to lock a thread with a snarky comment about people not behaving. I can't recall doing what you claim, but it's not impossible. 
    Honestly, that's not the worst idea, however it does tend to require anyone being a moderator being better than the rest of us, and well, we know how some people don't like thinking moderators think they're better than the rest.
    As for locking a thread, it gets handy when people play fast and loose with the edit function. Claiming you didn't do something that DOES violate the rules is a lot harder to do when it can't be erased. I prefer to have the evidence right there in plain sight, why wouldn't you?

    3-Personally, I tend to agree with this point, although you throwing that whole "free speech" thing in ruins it. You're coming off as elitist and superior to everyone else, and I'm sure that's not what you're trying to do, right? 
    "Free Speech" comes with responsibilities and restrictions, especially on websites. There's LOADS of things you can post here with no fear of it being deleted, especially if you're so adamant it's a site to help modellers. Calling them names and getting a flame war going isn't that. Again, what justifies deleting varies from person to person. I can come up with a lot of scenarios, but you don't seem to want to consider that your point of view doesn't work for everyone. People have left this site because of comments by others, and sorry, but that's not making it a friendly place to post. In fact, you pretty much make my point for me with your comments about people being afraid to post here because of the "textperts". If they are afraid to post here, please show me how having no restrictions on comments makes that better. Claiming people are "afraid" to post here is playing the martyr card again, and it's overused. 

    4-Context matters. If I post in a thread before it goes sideways, I can't moderate it? Doesn't seem right. If I'm involved in the problem, maybe. But define "involved". Saying "Hey there GW98765 knock it off" and then actively moderating later doesn't seem realistic to me. 

    5-That's an interesting idea. Given this site has trouble finding people to oversee a group build, it seems unworkable. And what's to stop the oversite board from not being biased? Seems like a level of bureaucracy that's not necessary.

    6-The first 4 reasons are already in play. The last one is rarely used, again, most people who claim to have been banned left of their own volition. Currently, people who repeatedly cause excessive complaints are given options to modify their behaviour. If they continue to be disruptive, they may wind up being removed. Simplistic solutions to problems in the discussion groups have been attempted, and in case you haven't noticed, some people don't play nice online. What can you do?

    7-Honestly, I'm not sure what happened to the "Rules of the Road". If you've been "away" a lot, you may have missed a couple migrations that went poorly, as well as other fun events that happen when you are dealing with online hosting sites. AFIAK the "RotR got lost in a shuffle some time back. Yes, it's a good idea to have them back. Funny thing, even when they were posted people fought the exact wording and acted like latrine lawyers over them. Personally, i would prefer to see them back up. Thanks for the input.

    Steve set up ARC the way it is with no politics, because of things he'd seen happen on RMS. I can't disagree with his stance.
     

    Quote

     

    Third scenario;

     

    Bamford is gone and only those who donate to the site become the "board" and take over ARC. If that's the case I'm out, not worth my time or effort trying to recommend to a select few how they should run their playground.

     

    Okie dokey. 

     

    Quote

     

    Forth scenario;  *Fourth*

    Bamford returns, then nothing changes and any recommendations will only fall on deaf ears.

     

    Experience over the years shows that often certain people make comments that either deliberately or accidentally inflame others. As a moderator I try to prevent that from happening, because huge flareups never leads to more people wanting to post. In fact, it tends to do the opposite. As for the whole "ganged up" scenario, that's a general problem on most websites. It's almost like watching a pack of jackals attacking a dinosaur.
     

    Quote

    Heck, your post shows me that you are part of the problem because you can't even acknowledge that there might even be the slightest bias in moderation here. Why do people leave, because they think they don't have an equal voice here, not because they storm off in a huff. You want people to come back, stop allowing the little "cliche" here get away with making snide political comments every time they see an opening and causing threads to get locked down. Stop allowing the left leaning members to get away with posting political comments and insulting members, have fair and even handed moderation. And if you don"t see any of what I mentioned happening then you are big part of the problem because as a moderator you are supposed to be unbiased and I see you are not.

    Really?
    "If you have serious suggestions on how to moderate the site, please post them. No vague hand wavium ones, real, actual real world ways to improve the moderation. Those of us who've done that job for a very long time would love to see what new ideas you can bring to the table. "Fair and even handed" is vague. It usually boils down to one person wants their point of view left unchallenged, even in the face of facts, and they storm off in a huff. So please tell us exactly how you can appease experts who cannot abide being questioned and others who have new information. "
     

    Of COURSE there is a bias in moderation, to think otherwise is silly. Is it always biased in the direction you think it is? Not really. Certain people have pushed narratives in the past along specific political lines, and when told to tone it down have become less than cooperative. Are we picking on them for their leanings? No, we're responding to complaints about them. It's no different if you were throwing eggs at the neighbours house and the cops told you to knock it off. Sure, it's funny, but it's annoying the neighbours. But you're being picked on because you voted a certain way?
    No. 

    Who are you referring to to get to "come back"? Like I said before Facebook and the like have sucked a lot of people away from places like ARC. Short of those social media sites shutting down, I don't see many returning from them.

    As for a "clique" ("cliché" means  "a phrase or opinion that is overused and betrays a lack of original thought", like "left leaning members"), some of the people here seem to be the few that are actively using this site. Are you seriously suggesting we throttle the ones actually active here? Is that a "we had to burn down the village to save it" kind of idea, because that's just not going to work. 
    Again, that's "victim mode" in play, and not very well exectuted at that. You claim the lefties gang up and cause threads to get shut down, yet you also claim the righties are singled out for being locked. Well, which is it? If the lefties are causing threads to get locked, then it's their fault.

    And use the "Report post" function instead of whatever else you do. If you have a problem with "left leaning" comments, REPORT THE POST. There is a system in place to deal with problems. If you refuse to use it, you cannot complain about the system being biased.

    I've been a moderator here for, well, maybe 20 years. I've seen a LOT of BS go down, and I've seen a LOT of the same type of person making problems. You know what? Not all of them are from the same side of the political spectrum. Just because your own biases won't let you admit to it doesn't mean it didn't happen. As far as I'm concerned if a person cannot follow the rules, then that's when the moderators get involved. You might want to lump me in with everyone else who is a moderator, that's your prerogative, but you'd be wrong to think we all walk alike and talk alike. I'm pretty sure I sound funny to the guys from overseas. It does show you seem to have a bias yourself.
     

    Quote

    Now, you asked for my opinion, there is it, like it or not. And I will say this in closing, I probably just wasted an hour of my time because I'm sure you and others will comeback and say if I don't like here why don't I leave. Well, I basically had, if you noticed I stopped posting and only posted a rebuttal in defense of a manufactures product after it was called (IMO) unrealistic. I then decided to offer an opposing view on this topic and to show not everyone thinks alike. Not everyone here is enthralled with Mr. Bamford, they post here to help out their fellow modeler's and provide information that hardly anyone else can, not because they like the owner.

    Thank you for your input. Honestly you bring up one or two decent points, although your horrendous bias makes them difficult to take seriously. 
    Again, try to not be a martyr. I'm certainly not telling you to leave, just for the entertainment value alone it's worth it for you to stay. 😛
    But seriously, if you want to "improve" ARC, have you? What exactly have YOU contributed to the site lately? Content input is vital to this site, and we're always looking for some useful modelling information. FS numbers, loadouts, colour images, opinions on kits (oh that's a fun area, isn't it? Fan bois sure get wound up on that subject! Tread carefully, but facts matter)
    But no, I didn't notice you stopped posting. Go figure.

    Alvis 3.1

     

    SBARC... Are you okay...

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    On 4/17/2022 at 12:35 PM, GW8345 said:

    Some food for thought (if anything it will re-enforce why most here think I'm an a-hole);

     

    1) This site does not generate any revenue for Mr. Bamford, why would he put any effort into it?

     

    2) If he is hurting for money and working 3 jobs why is there a video (posted a month ago) of his wife shopping for clothes/shoes/sunglasses (not really critical necessities)? (You would think that if you are hurting for money you wouldn't be out shopping like she did and donating money to a mall performer.)

     

    3) As someone has stated, no matter how busy you are you always have time to let friends know you are ok. People have reach out to him outside of this site and have not received an answer, it's like he is purposely avoiding this site and anyone associated with it, why?

     

    4) In the one video his wife made I noticed that Mr. Bamford is not the one recording (unless he got really tanned, grew a beard and has a man-bun), who is paying for that individual to follow her around and play cameraman? Again, if you are hurting so badly for funds that you have to work 3 jobs I doubt you would be spending money to pay someone to follow your wife around an video tape her.

     

    My guess the above will either be deleted by a mod and I'll get banned but (to me) it had to be said, there is no money for Mr. Bamford in this site so there is no reason for him to put anymore effort into it. ARC is a dead-stick........................................

    Don't worry, you aren't on the Tally Banned list. Fun fact: Very few people get banned from ARC. Most flounce off on their own.


    As who who "made" the site, yes, it's the content for the members who "make the site". Steve just paid the bills to host it, and set it up to run.
    But hey, nice swipe at Steve, knowing he's not around to defend his reputation. I'm sure your "source in the know" has their facts right, uh huh? Noticed you didn't name them.


    ARC doesn't generate enough money to support itself. it's been that way for decades, likely since day 1. Steve has never made that a secret. People do things for reasons other than money. Steve's also made it clear why he's wanted ARC to exist, so it can be a place where modellers can share info, and avoid the fractious issues of the old rec.mod.scale site. Some of that followed Steve here, and some of that went away too.


    If you have serious suggestions on how to moderate the site, please post them. No vague hand wavium ones, real, actual real world ways to improve the moderation. Those of us who've done that job for a very long time would love to see what new ideas you can bring to the table. "Fair and even handed" is vague. It usually boils down to one person wants their point of view left unchallenged, even in the face of facts, and they storm off in a huff. So please tell us exactly how you can appease experts who cannot abide being questioned and others who have new information. 

    The vast majority of actions moderators now have to handle here are the spam events. Currently they are under control. 


    Since Face Book showed up, sites like this have taken hard hits. Traffic is seriously down, and with sites like Face Book you can avoid seeing opinions you don't like. That's a bit harder here. While several fractious events in the past haven't increased traffic here, they were all long ago, and no longer are a factor in current operations here.

     

    Why would Steve's wife have a video of her shopping if Steve is working 3 jobs? I wouldn't think that would require asking.

     

    Why hasn't Steve contacted anyone? I would have to assume he has his reasons, and I don't take that as a personal insult. 


    As for why somebody would pay somebody else to video their wife who is making monetised content videos, well, that's called paying for a service. A valued adding service. People have a job making videos that are professionally edited and shot. Did you notice the large amount of drone content? The guy is most likely a paid producer of content. Sometimes you have to spend money to make money. Since you don't know exactly what the specific economic goings on are behind the scenes, all you're doing is just pointless speculation bordering on rumour mongering. He's likely better off paying somebody to shoot the material than take time off work to do it himself. You know, that 3 jobs thing.

    In any case, until Steve gets in contact with anyone, it's all supposition. I'm sure many are concerned, but getting wound up on the discussion board isn't going to make him show up any sooner.

    And yes, I know it's Easter, but let's try to dial down the self martyring statements.

     

    Alvis 3.1
     

    The Final Countdown

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    5 hours ago, rightwinger26 said:

    So I was pondering, let’s say for some reason the Nimitz didn’t return to the future, but it didn’t bring a speedy end to the war, let’s say, the attack on the Japanese Fleet was recalled, they raced for the time warp, and it snapped shut heartbreakingly close.  Sooner or later, probably sooner, our aircraft take a pounding, the ships supply system would runout, so the modern air wing would quickly turn into static displays (I get it, they could engineer more, but this more fun).  Think about the Nimitz with an uber WWII air wing on board, maybe an up/back dated AA armament, maybe painted in measure 32. It could have been its own TF.  That could be a cool what if build.

    There was a story posted online that outlined this scenario. I've long lost the link, but the author covered the use of missiles and guided weapons, as they'd be irreplacable in the 40s, and the US gearing up to produce ammo and ordnance that would work with the 1980s aircraft. Crew would get split up from the Nimitz and posted to ships that would incorporate things like radar systems derived from the Nimitz, and engineers and maintainers on jet engines and the like. Even an S-3 would be an incredibly fast aircraft for 1942. If I recall, the Nimitz struck the IJN force and caused severe damage, but the Japanese found the remains of a shot down aircraft and surmised it was from the future, and drastically changed their war plans. So much for knowing what would be to come. Not wanting to risk losing any of the future aircraft would limit the Nimitz's aircraft from being used in any kind of knock out blow.
    He got into some of the sociological ramifications of an integrated UN ship showing up in 1941 Pearl Harbor, and the sudden wealth found by crewmen in possession of things like an early Apple computer and a Gibson electric guitar. 
    The US sets up producing aircraft it can actually build in the 1940s with engines derived from data the Nimitz and her crew would have, and settle on the A4 Skyhawk as the main attack aircraft.
    I've always wanted to make a back-dated A-4, 500 pound bombs on it, sporting a 1944 era scheme, stars and bars with no red in them, but i never thought of a Measure 32 Nimitz! 

×
×
  • Create New...