Preventing joycamptours - a piece of advice for mods

Tosa, please examine the WW1 and WW2 threads. Most discussions are as it follows "Side X commited that atrocity against my people. That people commited that atrocity." And even though some of the stuff is documented by no means that documentation (citing clearly biased sources like Ellie Viesel on Jews in Romania) cannot provide the basis for a healthy debate, despite honest disillusioned people like TinCow who thinks he can stand in an ivory tower and not get involved in a dangerous way.

Tosa, there are other boards for this kind of chesspit discussions. That forums usually contain a lot of locked threads, banned people and annoyed staff. The ideal of the Org is to provide a friendly enviroment for all where everyone can feel confortable despite historical hostilites between members.

Just like saying:
This bloodbaths divide us, but I want you and I to have a productive, healthy cooperation since the goal of this board is to create a community, not give you or I approval on the matter.As long as we keep our silance on the matter everyhing is fine, bring the matter into question and all that work is ruined. And maybe after we are long dead, our children might finally manage a healthy peace.

That is why we must keep modern history out of the Org.

Magyars and Romanians traditionally are like Hattfields and McCoys. I once had a gentleman called Forgus on the EB team.We ware discussing the defacing of the RTR site by Turkish nationalists and Edyz had the dumb ideea of bringing the Romanian-Magyar relationships into discussion.Forgus retaliated in force and I was drawn unwillingly into the mess.It nearly ruined everything and turned me into a troll.I still regret it.
All it takes is a handful of self-righteous pricks like Tribesy or the french poster with a royal name to start a flamewar. This is it, elitist pricks who in the Backroom or Monastery exploit obvious fallacies like Godwin's Law to anger you.

I have no doubt that Louis will use Godwin's Law in the opening argument or that he will try to make me appear as a subhuman bloodthirsty balkan nationalist worthy of "Cherem" which in Romanian/Yiddish is written the same and means the same thing "ignore poster".
Louis, if Hooahguy had the politeness to understand and be quiet about it, why do you still insist in your nothingains?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cronos Impera

Could you ask Herodotus for objectivity over the Greek Wars? Not, because he lived through the period.True history is written by living persons about persons long forgotten.

---

History is about things that never happened written by people that were never there to see it happen. Therefore we can only form opinions about the past, but never know the whole truth. Best to accept that - it's far easier this way.

One thing I don't understand is how we turned from free love and peace in the 1960's mainstream to today. It is like the 1960's never existed at all.

Though, there is probably more truth in that comment than realised. Many people in the 1960's aren't these people you actually see in Austin Powers and other TV shows, majority of them had quite "normal" lives. So if anything, the 1960's are a complete misrepresentation, or only around for a very brief and certain socioeconomic generation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cronos Impera

All it takes is a handful of self-righteous pricks like Tribesy or the french poster with a royal name to start a flamewar. This is it, elitist pricks who in the Backroom or Monastery exploit obvious fallacies like Godwin's Law to anger you.

I have no doubt that Louis will use Godwin's Law in the opening argument or that he will try to make me appear as a subhuman bloodthirsty balkan nationalist worthy of "Cherem" which in Romanian/Yiddish is written the same and means the same thing "ignore poster".
Louis, if Hooahguy had the politeness to understand and be quiet about it, why do you still insist in your nothingains?

---

Why am I not politely silent? Because I will not be intimidated by some internet cursing into silence about mass murder. :book:

I can perfectly well discuss 20th century events in a polite manner. If others can't, then it is up to them to refrain from participating.


Then again, it is considered extremely bad taste in Japan to bring up the subject of 'comfort girls'.
Which begs the question: which, and whose, norms ought to apply on the .org / the internet?

The world is full of taboos. For example, there are cultures who think it bizarre that there should be no sign below names that says 'male / female'. Posters will not know how to respond to other posters without this information.
Should the .org accomodate this?

In other countries, where it concerns (recent) history, a culture of silence exists. Sometimes out of larger cultural norms, sometimes to deal with painful episodes of the past, sometimes enforced from above, or enforced by those with an interest in keeping the silence.
Should this culture of silence be accepted by the .org?


These are difficult questions, certainly not as straightforward as they might appear. This is the watchtower, so I'll leave the subject with the questions raised.
I shall pass up on the opportunity to discuss some of the historical events brought up in this thread. The events are known, at any rate only a few mouse clicks away for those interested. Discussing them at lenght will no doubt prove to be fruitless.

I admire Louis's candor in the WWII/WWI Debates, and I hope that doesn't go away. It gets the discussion away from the continuous recycling of data from previous threads on the subject. It so far hasn't even gotten that bad, it provokes well thought out responses from our German Members, that by-and-large you wouldn't be able to hear outside of an internet forum, and I find that as interesting as the War and the Consequences thereof itself.

If you have a problem with it, you don't have to look at it, its that simple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

One thing I don't understand is how we turned from free love and peace in the 1960's mainstream to today. It is like the 1960's never existed at all.

Though, there is probably more truth in that comment than realised. Many people in the 1960's aren't these people you actually see in Austin Powers and other TV shows, majority of them had quite "normal" lives. So if anything, the 1960's are a complete misrepresentation, or only around for a very brief and certain socioeconomic generation.

---

aka - Recent History is still relevant to be discussed in conversations about History, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wakizashi

well thought out responses from our German Members

---

Our German members are very polite and knowledgable, and will keep a good discussion even when they think some criticism is unfair. I always have the feeling I can still have a beer with them afterwards and talk nonsense about football.


I had many a conversation about this with Adrian. We never quite worked it out, but I have a distinct feeling that people from larger countries are somewhat more used to their history being discussed than posters from smaller countries. And as a result are more relaxed about being scrutinized, can take a bit more criticism. I mean, every Frenchman, American or German will have read an entire library of rubbish spouted about his country. Fine and whatever and all that. The Finnish, Polish, Romanian poster on the other hand may be less used to being the subject of debate by foreigners.

You have the same mechanism with cities. What does somebody from New York care what is written about NY in the Akron Post, or even in the national press? Whereas if some small town is on the news for the first time that decade, the locals tend to freak out.

I don't see this as a problem for the forum, but a lack of being able to control your emotions, self-control or whatever you want to call it. I wouldn't say banning a part of history from the Monastery would change that. In fact that is a ridiculous idea.:bow:

Poland is renowned for making terrible cheese.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Csargo

I don't see this as a problem for the forum, but a lack of being able to control your emotions, self-control or whatever you want to call it. I wouldn't say banning a part of history from the Monastery would change that. In fact that is a ridiculous idea.:bow:

---

Isn't that just the great thing about the internet, though? Because you're not next to the person you're talking to, you've always got the option to walk away for a little bit and let your emotions die down. It takes you clicking "Post a Reply", writing your post out, and then actually submitting for your reaction to be seen by anyone here. That is a lot of time to rethink your decision.

It's something more people should take advantage of, I think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

I had many a conversation about this with Adrian. We never quite worked it out, but I have a distinct feeling that people from larger countries are somewhat more used to their history being discussed than posters from smaller countries.

---

I guess it's how it's discussed and received. Up to this day I hear young German people talking about WW2, almost as if they were responsible for it them self. They aren't, nor their ancestors (most likely being normal people without say).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TosaInu

I guess it's how it's discussed and received. Up to this day I hear young German people talking about WW2, almost as if they were responsible for it them self. They aren't, nor their ancestors (most likely being normal people without say).

---

I'm certainly not one of them, I noticed in my discussion with Louis I used "we" and "the Germans" interchangeably, I'm a German, but not one of the Germans who did that. If my dad snapped and murdered my mom, would I have to apologize to my sister? :dizzy2:

If you helped dispose the body, yes.

:wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Monk

Isn't that just the great thing about the internet, though? Because you're not next to the person you're talking to, you've always got the option to walk away for a little bit and let your emotions die down. It takes you clicking "Post a Reply", writing your post out, and then actually submitting for your reaction to be seen by anyone here. That is a lot of time to rethink your decision.

It's something more people should take advantage of, I think.

---

Yes that is what I meant. You've got plenty of time to step back and take some deep breaths or whatever to calm down. You will probably end up conveying your point better that way. It's always good to be cool and collected when you are discussing something controversial or that may become a very heated discussion. I agree with you completely on that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

I'm certainly not one of them, I noticed in my discussion with Louis I used "we" and "the Germans" interchangeably, I'm a German, but not one of the Germans who did that. If my dad snapped and murdered my mom, would I have to apologize to my sister? :dizzy2:

---

Actually, if your Dad snapped and killed some one elses Mother, would you have to apologise to their daughter?

Now your question is far more clouded and closer to the situation.

On one-hand, you never did it, so you could try to argue not. However, if you feel your father did something really bad, you could apologise condemning your father for what he did and let the daughter know your whole family isn't a bunch of brutes.

Without taboos there would not be a single human alive.

General use taboo:
You never ask your parents about their sexual experience.


Taboos are a healthy, civilised thing which keep cheeky weaklings from getting into trouble.It also keeps the structure intact.Wtihout them nations dissolve into individuals who form other nations and so on.

I posted Loius a message on the personal profile to deal with his provocations in the Backroom, where nothingains are popular and the mods more patient with a certain tone and style. All gentlemen, regardless of personal characteristics are invited to view it, have a good time and add it to favorites.

Simple principles which would make WW2 threads redundant

Quote:

---

Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth.
All animals are equal and humans are animals.

---

So far, no WW2 thread has expressed this rules and we all get in a :daisy: spiral. That would have ended A-worse-than-B, 9 million > 6 million and that kind of pathetic, imature replies. Don't make me dig for dirt.

Instead on focusing on technical parts such as equipment, food habits and such most threads start with "That guy killed a whole village of that people, if you are a member of his tribe you should be ashamed." Than that guy comes with his bodycount and we all end up in a bodycount thread, with grousome execution details.Then we all end up with a horrible nausea and start blaming the other side for throwing the first rock.Then the mods get tired eventually and close the thread.

Does it worth a byte's length to fill the board with this kind of stuff?

Some history is for the family/tribe/nation....use other non-controversial stuff like sarissa-length, military tactics used in the Maccabe uprising, the War of the Roses, and wars in general from a time when factions ware centered around other criteria then today. When mighty dynasties clashed, when the Ptolemaioi and Seleukidiai mobilised the whole middle east.When Afghanistan was Hellenic/Kushan/Persian or when pirates threatened whole nations with their colossal fleets.
Not waste energy on controversial nothingains which turn the Monastery into a semi-respectable Backroom for instant gratification.It doesn't help you develop personal skills or a firm morality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

Poland is renowned for making terrible cheese.

---

That's because the milk comes from Krakows. :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cronos Impera

General use taboo:
You never ask your parents about their sexual experience.

---

Your parents usually tell you about the moralities of sex, and sometimes speak from experience. Asking them about sexual experience can be done in a grown up and mature manner. Your parent might admit to mistakes, and using this, help a child learn and possibly not to repeat them.

Such a General-use-Taboo if anything is incorrect, and only goes into unessential prudishness if the original question was actually mature.

I believe you can ask any one who is actually a parent on the .org, if their child comes to that age where you talk about sex, if they would discuss it with their child in an adult manner, I would think the answer would be yes.

Again, you could argue it is about culture. When I was younger, I spoke to my parents in a mature and adult way about sex, there was a bit of a joke to it as well, but yes. These things were discussed, including other things related such as relationships and love. Being able to talk to your children helps them learn and understand, it makes you into a good parent.

Only taboo to it, would be the "wrong time and place" and if you are only being immature about it. Then again, shouldn't the taboo be "don't be immature" opposed to the alternative of banning it altogether?

So in short, opposed to just banning certain things, should you just ban "being immature on the subject" ?

The greatest difficulty I guess is responding in a mature way to an imature post.
When the guy beside you posts about why his cows are more sacred than yours and shoves you that post in your throat you ban him.

When the incident repeats itself a couple of times you grow tired of a case-to-case aproach and start locking threads (In EB we lock threads when they have a negative potential). The Org is about getting the best out of its members, despite their potential. Its simply not about getting the worse of Orgahs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

On one-hand, you never did it, so you could try to argue not. However, if you feel your father did something really bad, you could apologise condemning your father for what he did and let the daughter know your whole family isn't a bunch of brutes.

---

The latter can be expressed without apologizing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

The latter can be expressed without apologizing.

---

Indeed, though some link the condemnation of what occurred to apologising. There are many people who don't condemn wrongs sometimes, and even try to support the doings of lets say the father in the example, as he stands up in court and pleads 'Not Guilty'.

So it really depends.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cronos Impera

Instead on focusing on technical parts such as equipment, food habits and such most threads start with "That guy killed a whole village of that people, if you are a member of his tribe you should be ashamed." Than that guy comes with his bodycount and we all end up in a bodycount thread, with grousome execution details.Then we all end up with a horrible nausea and start blaming the other side for throwing the first rock.Then the mods get tired eventually and close the thread.

---

And what about the thousands of people who don't give a freaking damn about the technical parts of the war but are interested in the social and human aspects? I'm really not interested about who had the best WWII2 tank, who was the best general and who had the best tactic. There's a reason why WWII will be remembered for a long time, and it's certainly not because the T-34 was better than the SOMUA S-2.

This topic is full of bollox. Can't stand the discussion? Don't discuss. When people are too annoying for me, I simply leave a thread, and come back again at a later point if I feel more relaxed about it.

Hmm, seems like I'm late once again. Just to reply to the more interesting spots:

Quote:

---

1) you keep objectivity in the Monastery (no more biased content or passionate arguments)

---

Passionate arguments are good, as long as neither side gets angry or upset - the more effort put into a discussion, the richer it will be. As for biased content - if you can prove it is biased, do so, and disregard it further. If you can't, why are you calling it biased?

Quote:

---

2) Orgahs can focus on safer periods (Antiquity, Middle Ages, Early Colonial Age,Pirate Age)

---

I really don't see this as a benefit. They already have that right - now you're going to force it on them? No thanks.

Quote:

---

3) A friendlier enviroment for everyone by a simple taboo (everyone here has had a disturbing experience but seeing poping threads like "OMG, X ware persecuted in 19XX, how nasty ware those Y" is simply too insulting for some members

---

The problem isn't in the time period. "OMG, X were prosecuted in 18XX, how nasty were those Y" is no better. Both should be locked (imho, or given a shove in the right direction) for lack of objectivity and not stating sources. "Simply too insulting" is missing the point - such discussion is, as far as I can tell, against the rules of the monastery. If "Such book states these people were prosecuted in <year>, let's look at the politics of the time" is too much for you, I'd say the problem isn't in the thread.

Quote:

---

4) Allow our grand-grandchildren to delve into the Modern Age History

---

Quite the opposite. There is a reasonable chance this forum will be archived somewhere - by seeing what was being said about the politics at the time they were happening, they'll get a much better view than from merely reading the texts published in this time.

Quote:

---

Taboos are a healthy, civilised thing which keep cheeky weaklings from getting into trouble.

---

Trouble that is created merely by the existence of the taboo - to use your example, if it would not be considered taboo to talk to your parents about their sexual experiences, nobody would think you strange or rude for doing it.

Quote:

---

It also keeps the structure intact.Wtihout them nations dissolve into individuals who form other nations and so on.

---

So, not abiding to taboos means you start thinking for yourself. Gee, that really is an awful thing to do.

Quote:

---

Simple principles which would make WW2 threads redundant

Quote:

---

Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth.
All animals are equal and humans are animals.

---

---

Actually, "If they're not listening, stop talking" and "Making yourself look smart is better than making the opponent look stupid" seem far better principles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cronos Impera

I posted Loius a message on the personal profile to deal with his provocations

---

I've thought long and hard about all of this. I have a thousand different thoughts. Which I am too lazy to repeat here.

I am not going to open a seperate thread. Nothing good will come of it, for a number of reasons.

If you are really interested in discussing modern Romanian history, open some thread and I shall happily oblige.

If your interest however is in trying to ensure that Romanian history is not discussed, then sorry. This is a historical war games forum, so history of wars is a natural discussion topic. And when the subject comes up, I will continue to describe Romania as a fascist Nazi ally that murdered hundreds of thousands of Jews and other minorities of its own accord.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

I'm certainly not one of them, I noticed in my discussion with Louis I used "we" and "the Germans" interchangeably, I'm a German, but not one of the Germans who did that. If my dad snapped and murdered my mom, would I have to apologize to my sister? :dizzy2:

---

Hello Husar,

True. I tried to say something along the same lines. It some discussions it's exactly where it goes wrong: the Germans are bad, the male members in your family are bad (in this example) and so on.

It's going both ways I think. People hurling generalizations too easily and people reading them were they aren't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TosaInu

I guess it's how it's discussed and received. Up to this day I hear young German people talking about WW2, almost as if they were responsible for it them self. They aren't, nor their ancestors (most likely being normal people without say).

---

Hmmm...I think most Germans by now are a bit fed up with WWII. And with perennial moral appeals.

The German education system is excellent. Germans come out very informed and opiniated. Which is praiseworthy. Germany has had an examplary Vergangenheitbewaltigung. (=Dealing with the past). A lot of Germans are apologetic, especially the young and ideologic. And the German state is too.

But, there is also an overwhelming feeling, in Germany an in its neighbours, that WWII was 200 years ago. Ancient history. My grandparents got over it already. As did Husar's. (Once they were released and returned from Siber

One newer aspect, either overdue or perhaps at the right time, is that Germany has become assertive about its past too. Timidly expressing guilt is no longer the sole 'right' way of dealing with recent history. The German state recently has on several occasians said 'no' to requests for WWII compensation. There is an exploration of German suffering too, which is no longer taboo. In literature, the press, movies. (For cinema, see 'Dresden' or 'Die Flugt', for literature: Guenther Grass' 'Der Krebstgang')

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

I've thought long and hard about all of this. I have a thousand different thoughts. Which I am too lazy to repeat here.

I am not going to open a seperate thread. Nothing good will come of it, for a number of reasons.

If you are really interested in discussing modern Romanian history, open some thread and I shall happily oblige.

If your interest however is in trying to ensure that Romanian history is not discussed, then sorry. This is a historical war games forum, so history of wars is a natural discussion topic. And when the subject comes up, I will continue to describe Romania as a fascist Nazi ally that murdered hundreds of thousands of Jews and other minorities of its own accord.

---

You're the Senior Member. I myself can't start the thread. Its a privilage I'm giving to you as a senior member. Follow my guidelines and we'll have a healthy positive discussion. Ulike yourself, I haven't even deployed my grenadiers. You're still in Fussilier skirmishing mode, Monsieur.

Just like I said: it is you vs. me without anyone else.

Edit: I guess you're refusing the privilage and I have to start the thread myself (I'll post the rules in the first post).

I know this isn't the most reliable source, but what Louis claimed is also supported by Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History...a#World_War_II

Which cites:

Quote:

---

International Commission on the Holocaust in Romania (November 11, 2004). "Executive Summary: Historical Findings and Recommendations" (PDF). Final Report of the International Commission on the Holocaust in Romania. Yad Vashem (The Holocaust Martyrs' and Heroes' Remembrance Authority). http://yad-vashem.org.il/about_yad/w...VE_SUMMARY.pdf. Retrieved 2006-07-25.

---

Also at the time, Romania was part of the Axis powers.

What Louis says isn't that inaccurate. Even then, if you have issues with him personally, take it up in PM, the Forum isn't your personal war ground.

We allready have a precedent on the Backroom and I fail to see how this would constitute a war ground.
Debates are a healthy thing if started in the Backroom and with a mature ration.

I think we can test his objectivity and/or possibly validate the premises of this thread.

Cronos, you're a very strange person...