Jump to content

Recommended Posts

and her latest update was on 18th April 2022 in Stanley Park.. so he must be okay  filming her....

I still think he should pop in and say he is okay etc....

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, HOLMES said:

and her latest update was on 18th April 2022 in Stanley Park.. so he must be okay  filming her....

I still think he should pop in and say he is okay etc....

I subscribed to her channel and left a comment on one of the vids, she did reply with a thank you for supporting her.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the reason why I brought up his wife's videos, he is using them to fund this site, otherwise I couldn't care less about what she does. Hell, he has a banner at the top of the page with a pic of her barely dressed. If they don't want anyone to comment about their business, don't put it on the internet for the whole world to see.

 

Also, he did not start this site on his own, this site was started by three modelers, Bamford being one of them and the story I got 16 years ago from someone in the know is that he weaseled the site away from the other two but that's another topic.

 

As for donating money to help this site, only if changes are made in the way the rules are enforced and there is fair/even handed moderation, otherwise, it can go the way of the Do-do bird.

 

On last thing, Bamford did not make this site what it is, the member's did, Bamford is just the grounds keeper, the members are the team. To say that this site is what it is is a dis-service to all the members (past and present) who have posted here and shared their information so that the hobby can learn and grow from it. Why did so many come here, it was because there was members here that were in the know, not because Bamford was holding the keys. You needed to know something about the F-14, there was several F-14 experts here (a few actually worked on the aircraft), wanted to know something about things hanging off the wings, there was experts here who could answer your question from experience, wanted to know about Soviet aircraft, yep, there are expert here. It's not about who maintained the site, it was about who posted. Now, due to the way it has been ran most of those experts have either left or been banned, or chose not to post because they don't want to deal with the "texperts". If Bamford wants to let this site die it speaks volumes what he really thinks of the modeling community and the members here.

 

Just my opinion.................................................

Link to post
Share on other sites
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
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, bashace said:

I subscribed to her channel and left a comment on one of the vids, she did reply with a thank you for supporting her.

Awesome.. thats great.

:banana:

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Alvis 3.1 said:

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
 

 

Well said Al.

 

Brad 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2022 at 7:48 PM, Alvis 3.1 said:

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
 

Ok, let's unpack this a little bit;

 

Quote

I'm sure your "source in the know" has their facts right, uh huh? Noticed you didn't name them.

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.

 

Quote

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.

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.

 

Quote

People do things for reasons other than money.

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.

 

Quote

If you have serious suggestions on how to moderate the site, please post them.

I will, but let's first discuss what course this site is going to take after I'm done replying to your post.

 

Quote

No vague hand wavium ones,

Quote

"Fair and even handed" is vague.

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.

 

Quote

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.

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.

 

Quote

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.

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.

 

Quote

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.

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?

 

Quote

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

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".

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

Forth scenario;

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

 

The biggest problem with this site is that it lives in an echo chamber, no opposing view points or thoughts are allowed and if they are posted then they are quickly ganged up on, vilified and the thread is locked down. Member's don't want to post because they don't want to have to deal with the few regulars here that think it's their right to jump on people and insult them simply because they don't agree with their POV.

 

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.

 

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.

Edited by GW8345
Link to post
Share on other sites
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

 

Edited by Alvis 3.1
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, karl h said:

its not easy to get your replies if you post into the quotes....

Oops! my bad. I'll fixify that.

Alvis 3.1

Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Edited by Alvis 3.1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You might also notice, as far as I can see.....none of this conversation has been locked, modified or shut down. That left leaning comment? I think its fair to generalize (except on Tuesdays) that most everyone who uses this site would be more slightly right of centre. Don't know many tree hugging granola eating lefties that build models of flying death machines.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, phantom said:

Don't know many tree hugging granola eating lefties that build models of flying death machines.

 

Well, there's me, but I'm not normal.

 

 http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_X3lNYc1hcaE/TGsIJJpY3NI/AAAAAAAAAxU/_eQ28v8s8_U/s1600/232980-jar_jar_binks_large.jpeg

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, phantom said:

You might also notice, as far as I can see.....none of this conversation has been locked, modified or shut down. That left leaning comment? I think its fair to generalize (except on Tuesdays) that most everyone who uses this site would be more slightly right of centre. Don't know many tree hugging granola eating lefties that build models of flying death machines.

I tend to concur (although as much as I love my trees and granola, I consider myself to be in the center of the political spectrum).   The majority of political opinions on ARC tend to be coming from the right side of the spectrum.  I think in general that the mods are typically extremely patient with threads that have gone the political route.  

 

As far as only a few people being banned, most of the ones I'm aware of were simply trolls who added nothing to ARC.  The only one I recall who actually added a good deal of value was Jennings.    As much as the guy was a PITA at times, he added some outstanding content (probably more than 99% of the members) and content is the lifeblood of a site like this. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr GW8345, You seem to have an axe to grind with this site's owner? Why? This is a free site for you to visit, so why do you care what Steve Bamford does or doesn't do with it?

Give it a rest already.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, 11bee said:

I tend to concur (although as much as I love my trees and granola, I consider myself to be in the center of the political spectrum).   The majority of political opinions on ARC tend to be coming from the right side of the spectrum.  I think in general that the mods are typically extremely patient with threads that have gone the political route.  

 

As far as only a few people being banned, most of the ones I'm aware of were simply trolls who added nothing to ARC.  The only one I recall who actually added a good deal of value was Jennings.    As much as the guy was a PITA at times, he added some outstanding content (probably more than 99% of the members) and content is the lifeblood of a site like this. 

And I believe Jennings leaned left, if I recall correctly.  Not to get into politics, but just to address the subject of bias, I am definitely right-leaning.  I don't normally discuss it here, because I just think it doesn't really fit this site, but for the record, I voted for Trump last time and have never voted for a Democrat for US president, and I have never felt like I was being treated unfairly here.

 

The world is so politicized in so many ways these days, I am happy to have it not be a factor here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a long time commercial sponsor of the site and if something happens to the site I will gladly contribute funds and industry connections to support a new site. Hopefully Steve is well and will respond to the concerns aired here soon.

Edited by KursadA
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, KursadA said:

If you miss him so much, you can find him at Hyperscale where he is writing under an assumed identifty and deftly avoiding recognition with the nimble moves of a roadrunner.

Easy bud....   I don't know this guy from a hole in the wall but I do miss his content.  Until he got booted for reasons unknown, the guy was a very active participant on ARC and certainly provided more interesting and engaging content than maybe most / all of our "paid commercial sponsors". 

 

Not sure if anyone has noticed but ARC has been dying a slow death for a few years now.  I would think we would welcome anyone who is good for a few posts a week that get people engaged and involved.     Some of our forums haven't seen a new post in days or weeks.    You can say that this is due to the impact of FB but I'm on a few other modeling forums and their traffic is pretty much the same as it's been for years, so maybe, just maybe, there are other issues contributing to ARC slowing down besides social media. 

 

Regarding following Jennings over at HS, that will never happen because after a year of trying to get my password issue resolved, I finally gave up. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Alvis 3.1 said:

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. 

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

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)


 

 

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

 

 

 

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.


 

 

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.

 

 

 

And yet here you are doing just that. Weird.

 

 

 

 

Okay, more unpacking required here:
1-"No Politics" really should be called "Don't be an fool", 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.

 

 

 

Okie dokey. 

 

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.

 

 

 

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.

 

 

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

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Brad-M said:

Mr GW8345, You seem to have an axe to grind with this site's owner? Why? This is a free site for you to visit, so why do you care what Steve Bamford does or doesn't do with it?

Give it a rest already.

You are correct, I'm not a fan of Mr. Bamford but that shouldn't stop me from being able to voice my opinion about this site. Maybe I care just a little about this site and maybe don't want to see it go the way of the Do-do bird, still on the fence if you know what I mean.

 

As to give it a rest, why don't you just put me on ignore and you don't have to read what I write, then my mean words won't bother you any more.

Edited by GW8345
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...