My apologies for recent threads

[MrsWargamer]

I get bored, and I get chatty, and I sometimes forget the boundaries.
Never my intent.
In fact, this forum massively improved when it booted questionable content.
I forget that occasionally.
I come here 99.9% to buy the best in wargaming.
And it makes sense that the discussion should stick to wargaming.

With that in mind, I plan to either discuss specific wargames or not post at all.
No this is not in response to anything. Which is nice.
I'm going to keep my nonwargaming babble on sites built for that function.

[Lobster]

Wut? [&:]

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: MrsWargamer

I get bored, and I get chatty, and I sometimes forget the boundaries.
Never my intent.
In fact, this forum massively improved when it booted questionable content.
I forget that occasionally.
I come here 99.9% to buy the best in wargaming.
And it makes sense that the discussion should stick to wargaming.

With that in mind, I plan to either discuss specific wargames or not post at all.
No this is not in response to anything. Which is nice.
I'm going to keep my nonwargaming babble on sites built for that function.

warspite1

Thanks for the apology - we move on [:)]

[Lobster]

If this is about the family thread there are folks in my family and neighbors I don't get along with too. I just accept the fact that not everyone is the same and it would be a very boring place if they were and move on from there. Doesn't make you a bad person or a good person just a human person. [;)]

[RangerJoe]

Canadian apologies:

In most of Big Canada Land

. . . It typically provides that an apology:

does not constitute an admission of fault or liability
must not be taken into consideration in determining fault or liability
is not admissible as evidence of fault or liability
.
.
.
An apology is generally defined in the statutes as encompassing an expression of sympathy and regret and a statement that one is sorry, or any other words or actions indicating contrition or commiseration, whether or not the words or actions admit or imply an admission of fault.

https://www.cmpa-acpm.ca/en/advice-publ ... physicians

Apology Act, 2009

Definition

1. In this Act,

“apology” means an expression of sympathy or regret, a statement that a person is sorry or any other words or actions indicating contrition or commiseration, whether or not the words or actions admit fault or liability or imply an admission of fault or liability in connection with the matter to which the words or actions relate. 2009, c. 3, s. 1.

Effect of apology on liability

2. (1) An apology made by or on behalf of a person in connection with any matter,

(a) does not, in law, constitute an express or implied admission of fault or liability by the person in connection with that matter;

(b) does not, despite any wording to the contrary in any contract of insurance or indemnity and despite any other Act or law, void, impair or otherwise affect any insurance or indemnity coverage for any person in connection with that matter; and

(c) shall not be taken into account in any determination of fault or liability in connection with that matter. 2009, c. 3, s. 2 (1).
.
.
.

https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/ ... 9-c-3.html

In other words, in most of Big Canada Land, an apology is not to be confused with an actual apology:

Definition of apology

1a : an admission of error or discourtesy accompanied by an expression of regret
.
.
.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/apology

[MrsWargamer]

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
But definitely, I'm doing a facepalm.

[MrRoadrunner]

[8|]

RR

[Rosseau]

I haven't read your latest post, but there are some people who don't need to apologize, and the OP is one of them. One's reputation over the years proceeds you!

[MrsWargamer]

ORIGINAL: Rosseau

I haven't read your latest post, but there are some people who don't need to apologize, and the OP is one of them. One's reputation over the years proceeds you!

Very considerate of you dear.

[wodin]

You're all good

[LarryP]

It seems to me that a historical war game site would be the first to support all free speech, especially religion and politics. Facebook, Twitter, and many others are banning free speech too, mostly if that speech does not fit their agenda. Where did all the thin skinned people come from?! Can't even use just one section named General Discussion to let it all out?

Well, I probably just took over MrsWargamer's job of getting threads locked, just had to vent...

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: LarryP

It seems to me that a historical war game site would be the first to support all free speech, especially religion and politics. Facebook, Twitter, and many others are banning free speech too, mostly if that speech does not fit their agenda. Where did all the thin skinned people come from?! Can't even use just one section named General Discussion to let it all out?

Well, I probably just took over MrsWargamer's job of getting threads locked, just had to vent...

You specifically mention the two subjects that they insist on keeping off the thread.[:-]

Their website, their rules.

[LarryP]

True, their website, we support.

[rico21]

ORIGINAL: LarryP

It seems to me that a historical war game site would be the first to support all free speech, especially religion and politics. Facebook, Twitter, and many others are banning free speech too, mostly if that speech does not fit their agenda. Where did all the thin skinned people come from?! Can't even use just one section named General Discussion to let it all out?

Well, I probably just took over MrsWargamer's job of getting threads locked, just had to vent...

Terribly unfair to Mrs Wargamer.[:-]

So what do you propose?[&:]
A short walk to the Matrix headquarters?[:D]

[MrsWargamer]

Back a number of years now, there was a subforum, called 'Art of Wargaming'. It was a moshpit cesspool of unrestrained, unrestricted, don't go in there if you can't handle the worst of humanity.

Finally, our hosts accepted that it was more harm than good. I was one of those campaigning for it to be deleted.
EVERY site that has a primary function, and includes an anything goes section, suffers from its inclusion. All of them.

The fans here, that missed the section, got in a snit, and went to make their own place. It's out there, I think. I have no way of knowing. It's all wargamer and all nasty. Some of the members are here, and they behave just fine 'here'. And it just proves the point of the policy.
And I sometimes push the boundary a bit too far. My apology was genuine. But I admit, a certain comment really upset me in response to the apology. And then a nice remark made me smile again.

I have a thin skin, I admit it. Gender weakness. Men are inclined to be rough and combative. Women frequently not so much (although, we sure can be bitches for the right reason).

Wargaming though presents a sort of paradox. War is politics by another method. What we are all obsessed with here, is simulations of what happens when diplomacy fails. The idea that politics isn't allowed, on a forum that does its best to incorporate politics in a wargaming environment, seems contrary.
But no one has trouble discussing politics from another time, through other often long-dead people. Because it doesn't actually involve us. Yet. sometimes it does. The Combat Mission franchise currently on sale depicts very real places in the very real current world. And we all know, there are wargamers there. The design offers nothing of interest to me. If I ever buy into Combat Mission's more recent design evolution, it will be for WW2 settings. I have no interest in CM modern even if it were free. The Command series is likely quite good software. I have zero interest in modern operations though. I tend to only want to play out simulations of history that actually happened. I prefer WW2. It was global. It was at a tech level that I prefer. The next war will likely be fought increasingly from in front of complex computer systems. Our weapons are rapidly going to a no-human present option. Machines fighting with a human controlling it from potentially the other side of the planet.

Politics is rapidly becoming more about competing corporations. Not much in the way of simple material to create a wargame from. We might soon see an end to 'wargames' options.

This post has strayed a long way from my apology.
But that's conversations fer ya eh. Ya open a thread, and you never know where it's going to go.

[Erik Rutins]

Personally, I am in strong support of free speech and as an American, I cherish our constitution and the bill of rights and the principles that created them. Outside of a professional capacity, in "real life", I'd be happy to have a civil discussion about politics any day of the week (though on the internet civil discussions seem sadly quite a bit more rare these days than when we founded Matrix 20 years ago).

This is also why we did try when Matrix first started to allow a "free for all" forum to discuss anything that was on anyone's mind. What we found (and it's perhaps a bigger question as to whether this is just how things work on the internet or more a reflection of where our "offline" viewpoints have gone over the years) was that it unfortunately ended up being a source of significant hard feelings and division within the community. We made a decision many years ago to keep our company forums focused on games and gaming. That is both their natural purpose and it's also a common interest that unites all of us who are here, regardless of our views outside this hobby. We very deliberately would rather this place be a unifying influence on war and strategy gamers than a dividing one. In my opinion, there is much more that unites us than what divides us, though the divisions often take the focus if they are allowed to. Hence, discussing recent politics and religion are not appropriate here and haven't been for years. As we all know, there are many other places on the internet where such discussions can happen, including other gaming or wargaming-oriented forums and clubs. I have nothing against those links being shared if folks are interested in having such discussions there.

Specifically to Mrs. Wargamer, thanks for the apology and I do understand the connection between politics and war and it's of course natural for an informed citizen to have an interest in politics. However, please note that continued attempts to start political threads here (to be clear, this is not one) will result in an official warning.

Regards,

- Erik

[MrsWargamer]

Thanks for your thoughts Erik. You are one of the bonuses to the site.

[Kuokkanen]

Please check out Discord, TeamSpeak, or IRC. Those are wonderful real-time chat programs, and first 2 have group voice feature (microphone required, obviously). Discord is most advanced, but older ones are still good ways to communicate over Internet.

What comes to apologies on Internet, there seems to be people who tend to say: "Apologize more!" or something equivalent. It can take strict moderation to keep such nonsense out, and then crowd cries censorship. It's on the news.

[RFalvo69]

ORIGINAL: Kuokkanen
It can take strict moderation to keep such nonsense out, and then crowd cries censorship. It's on the news.

What part of the crowd misses is how there can't be "censorship" on a private platform. You agree to the platform's terms of use and then you have to abide to them.

There is really not much difference between this forum and, let's say, Twitter. What changes is where the bar is positioned. Here political or religious posts are a big no no, while on Twitter you are free to express yourself on these matters - but still you can't lie, condone/incite violence etc.

This is why when people scream about "censorship!!" if Twitter clamps down against these behaviours I'm sad about their haemorrhoids but I can only judge them as "clueless". Or hypocrites. To be totally honest, I firmly believe that a percentage of those who whine about Twitter's "censorship" know very well that Twitter is free to censor you if you break their terms of use; what they do want is to reach out hoping to gaslight their platforms.

We are living in changing times, times where social networks and internet fora are thrown under a new and unusual light. But it happened before and internet (and the mass media before it) always learned to adapt. It will happen here, too.

[LarryP]

I referred to Twitter and Facebook because they censor according to your political side. I do not consider myself a "haemorrhoid" or hemorrhoid, spelled correctally. [:D]