Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 18 of 19 1 2 16 17 18 19
#4051997 - 12/17/14 01:34 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: WernerVoss]  
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 10
Auva Offline
Junior Member
Auva  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 10
Welcome Whisner,
sometimes I think the Moderators here at SimHQ are somewhat like John James "Jack" McCoy from Law&Order, I love the original series, no matter who is here, they have to work for rules. I appreciate that, and I hope it won't change. I'm sick of some, funnily mostly russian based, forums where there is no way of saying what is wrong with the product or something.

#4052028 - 12/17/14 02:37 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: WernerVoss]  
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 601
SkullBiscuit Offline
Member
SkullBiscuit  Offline
Member

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 601
USA
OK,

Took a little bit....But I'm ready and got my card (first one in upper left corner)

[Image deleted]

Now...need the moderators to offer a prize for who gets to Bingo first biggrin

As humorous as that may be to at least some, I see that as potentially discouraging to posting.

Last edited by CyBerkut; 12/17/14 02:46 PM. Reason: Moderation
#4052035 - 12/17/14 02:45 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: WernerVoss]  
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 560
lokitexas Offline
Member
lokitexas  Offline
Member

Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 560
San Antonio, TX.
Thats freeking funny.

#4052042 - 12/17/14 02:55 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: SkullBiscuit]  
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 601
SkullBiscuit Offline
Member
SkullBiscuit  Offline
Member

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 601
USA
Originally Posted By: SkullBiscuit
OK,

Took a little bit....But I'm ready and got my card (first one in upper left corner)

[Image deleted]

Now...need the moderators to offer a prize for who gets to Bingo first biggrin

As humorous as that may be to at least some, I see that as potentially discouraging to posting.



Hmmmmm....I thought the inverse would be true biggrin


AMD 8 core at 4.7Ghz
16GB Ram
GTX 970 4GB
Sim on SSD
Win 7 64bit
#4052055 - 12/17/14 03:13 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: Bearcat99]  
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 257
Itkovian Offline
Member
Itkovian  Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 257
Originally Posted By: Bearcat99


As Bearcat already wrote, this is the answer right there:

[quote]Q. Why was the Digital Nature engine chosen instead of the CLOD engine?

A. The Digital Nature engine is an advanced game engine that has been developed over several years and powers ROF with great results. Besides being relatively bug free and well-functioning, it has advanced physics, realistic flight-modeling, progressive damage modeling, complex ballistics, detailed environmental modeling, detailed terrain modeling and superb graphics rendering. Above all else it is more modular and flexible than the CLOD engine. It can even support different types of player vehicles from main battle tanks to giant robots. Using the Digital Nature engine will provide users with a well-functioning product at launch that can be brought to market fairly quickly. It can still be further enhanced in the future as needed.


There's no need to look further, they already spelled it out for us. smile

What TF did with CLoD is pretty awesome, and I'm loving it as my go-to Battle of Britain sim... but let's not delude ourselves into thinking that they fixed the engine. They didn't. At best they fixed CloD itself, tweaking it until we finally have something enjoyable and functional. But the engine is not fixed by a long shot. CLoD is still a buggy mess requiring a lot of tweaking to get it in working condition.

It would certainly have taken a LOT longer to fix and use the CLoD engine for BoS than using DN. There's a reason 1C struggled so much with CloD in the first place, and given that history the decision to switch to a proven engine is certainly a wise one.

And really, it shows: BoS on release is a stable, reliable, and beautifully polished simulator right out of the box (regardless of complaints about the design, the above cannot be denied). Sure, DN has other limitations, but that doesn't change the fact they were able to release a well made product with very little technical issues (heck, even Early Access worked pretty well).

#4052066 - 12/17/14 03:29 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: Itkovian]  
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 560
lokitexas Offline
Member
lokitexas  Offline
Member

Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 560
San Antonio, TX.
Originally Posted By: Itkovian


There's no need to look further, they already spelled it out for us. smile

What TF did with CLoD is pretty awesome, and I'm loving it as my go-to Battle of Britain sim... but let's not delude ourselves into thinking that they fixed the engine. They didn't. At best they fixed CloD itself, tweaking it until we finally have something enjoyable and functional. But the engine is not fixed by a long shot. CLoD is still a buggy mess requiring a lot of tweaking to get it in working condition.

It would certainly have taken a LOT longer to fix and use the CLoD engine for BoS than using DN. There's a reason 1C struggled so much with CloD in the first place, and given that history the decision to switch to a proven engine is certainly a wise one.

And really, it shows: BoS on release is a stable, reliable, and beautifully polished simulator right out of the box (regardless of complaints about the design, the above cannot be denied). Sure, DN has other limitations, but that doesn't change the fact they were able to release a well made product with very little technical issues (heck, even Early Access worked pretty well).


If the answer from 777/1c on the DN is satisfactory for you great. At the same time, if you eat Subway you can lose 300 pounds. If you buy a Ford truck you can haul an airplane. If you drink Bud Light you are a party stud. If you wear Nikes you can dunk like Jordan.

Just saying its called marketing. It is what a company does to sell you a product or idea. Some truth, some extended truth, and there is always the fine print.

While I agree some of BoS works out of the box, some does not. My personal issue is the sounds not registering when being hit, which makes it NOT work for me and others. There are others who have issues even running it on decent machines. So no the "working" is not universal.

Lets say my sounds did work. I could agree the game is stable and runs fine then. At the same time what does "work" is boring. What does "work" is kindergarten. What does "work" is stale and nothing interesting to me. Why does it matter if it works, if its not worth using?

Ill use another analogy. A brand new Smart Car works. But I would rather drive the dinged and paint faded Mustang on a track. At least there is a thrill to be had with it, and even though I have to put oil in it more regularly at least its fun and does things the Smart Car cant do.

#4052074 - 12/17/14 03:47 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: Itkovian]  
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,398
KodiakJac Offline
Member
KodiakJac  Offline
Member

Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,398
USA
Originally Posted By: Itkovian
And really, it shows: BoS on release is a stable, reliable, and beautifully polished simulator right out of the box (regardless of complaints about the design, the above cannot be denied).


That may be the case for some players, but not for others. BoS runs as badly for me as CloD did out of the box before the Team Fusion patch. The framerate is unplayable near the ground and I have to use autopilot to control the planes during takeoff. I wondered if it was just me even though my system meets the "Recommended" system requirements and RoF runs as smooth as silk for me, but after looking around in the BoS and Steam forums (as well as here) there are also others with framerate and CTD problems.

I'm not trying to be all gloom and doom about it, as I really think it will be worked out, but its not all peaches and cream for a number of players who meet the Minimum or Recommended system requirements, and the problems seem to be centered around some (not all) AMD GPU's and CPU's.

And as other players have noted, in contacting 1CGS Customer Support I received a polite canned response but then crickets on follow-up notes when the canned response didn't work. I have spent more hours trying to fix my framerate in BoS than playing the game.


Dogfighting is what you do "after" you drop your bombs and blow something up!
Can you say "JABO!" thumbsup
#4052076 - 12/17/14 03:52 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: WernerVoss]  
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 766
SharpeXB Offline
Member
SharpeXB  Offline
Member

Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 766
If 1CGS had tried to use the CoD engine instead of DN, BoS would be scheduled for release some time in 2016. Even if it's the case that TF has fixed and improved it, it's taken them almost 2 years. I know they're modders and don't have the code but even 1C tried to fix it for a year and didn't suceed. Seriously this question is rather moot.
Was 1CGS really going to choose and engine that?
1. Wasn't finished
2. That apparently was only understood by Maddox himself according to what's been said here.

None of these flight sim game engines are perfect. All the complaints about DN could be said about anything else. They're all compromises.
For any of them I choose to see the good and not the bad.

As it stands now 1CGS suceeded in something no other developer has accomplished in over a decade. They delivered what they said they would do and did it on time. Faulting them for that is misplaced.

Last edited by SharpeXB; 12/17/14 04:01 PM.

Velocity Micro PC | Asus Z97-A | i7-4790K @4.7GHz | Corsair H80iGT Liquid CPU Cooler | 32GB DDR3-1600MHz Memory | EVGA GTX 1080 Ti SC 11GB | 240gb Intel 520 Series SSD | 850 W Corsair PSU | Windows 10 Home | Samsung U28D590D UHD 28" Monitor | Bose Companion 5 Speakers | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5
#4052100 - 12/17/14 04:26 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: WernerVoss]  
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,671
Sunchaser Offline
Member
Sunchaser  Offline
Member

Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,671
Houston, Tx.
Some would take exception to the statement that they delivered what they said they would. So whether faulting them for that is misplaced is a matter of opinion.

Also, much of the fault directed at 1c/777 has little to do with the pretty pictures the game can produce, it has to do with how the other features flightsimmers expect from the product work or do not.

There are many who take exception with the changes just prior to roll out of the game too, may we fault them for that or has that also been deemed misplaced?

Something that may lead to a slap on the hand or more drastic repercussions:
We have been subjected to a blitz from some from the BOS forums, who seem to have ran out of people over there to berate or ban and they seem to have played the victim card here with success.

They seem to have convinced the moderation here that they have been misread and are in fact being unfairly picked on to the extent that they need rescuing.

Not cool, but only my opinion.

We are fortunate, whatever side we take, to have a life that allows us to play these silly word games over sillier flying or whatever other kind of games we play.

We all maybe need to step back a bit.

#4052114 - 12/17/14 04:36 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: WernerVoss]  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,562
Airdrop01 Offline
Chief Pheasant Controller
Airdrop01  Offline
Chief Pheasant Controller
Hotshot

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,562
Kansas, USA
The good news: They've so destroyed any chance at a successful product outside the old Soviet Union that they are going to be stuck accepting essentially worthless rubles by the time this is finished.

So once again, in an Adam Smith was right again moment, the market will annihilate the purveyors of the piss poor product and particularly piss poor customer relations.

The better news: We are about two months from pitchers and catchers reporting!!

Last edited by Airdrop01; 12/17/14 04:38 PM. Reason: Baseball

"For I know the plans that I have for you," declares the Lord, "plans for welfare and not for calamity to give you a future and a hope." Jeremiah 29:11

Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me. Matthew 5:11

Indeed we call blessed those who have persevered. You have heard of the perseverance of Job, and you have seen the purpose of the Lord, because “the Lord is compassionate and merciful. James 5:11
#4052146 - 12/17/14 05:15 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: Airdrop01]  
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 277
xXNightEagleXx Offline
Member
xXNightEagleXx  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 277
Originally Posted By: Airdrop01
The good news: They've so destroyed any chance at a successful product outside the old Soviet Union that they are going to be stuck accepting essentially worthless rubles by the time this is finished.

So once again, in an Adam Smith was right again moment, the market will annihilate the purveyors of the piss poor product and particularly piss poor customer relations.

The better news: We are about two months from pitchers and catchers reporting!!

Edited by Airdrop01 (37 minutes 10 seconds ago)
Edit Reason: Baseball



WOW that's a good reason....baseball..... XD

Last edited by WillianG; 12/17/14 05:16 PM. Reason: BOS metacritic score is damn too high
#4052160 - 12/17/14 05:31 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: Sunchaser]  
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 766
SharpeXB Offline
Member
SharpeXB  Offline
Member

Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 766
Originally Posted By: Sunchaser
We have been subjected to a blitz from some from the BOS forums

So it's not acceptable on this forum to post opinions about Battle of Stalingrad on a section dedicated to Battle of Stalingrad discussion on a thread that was admittedly started by someone to attack Battle of Stalingrad?

What was that about censorship again? I'm confused...


Velocity Micro PC | Asus Z97-A | i7-4790K @4.7GHz | Corsair H80iGT Liquid CPU Cooler | 32GB DDR3-1600MHz Memory | EVGA GTX 1080 Ti SC 11GB | 240gb Intel 520 Series SSD | 850 W Corsair PSU | Windows 10 Home | Samsung U28D590D UHD 28" Monitor | Bose Companion 5 Speakers | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5
#4052177 - 12/17/14 05:50 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: SharpeXB]  
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,179
bisher Offline
I'll be your Huckleberry
bisher  Offline
I'll be your Huckleberry
Veteran

Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,179
Manitoba, Canada
Originally Posted By: SharpeXB
Originally Posted By: Sunchaser
We have been subjected to a blitz from some from the BOS forums

So it's not acceptable on this forum to post opinions about Battle of Stalingrad on a section dedicated to Battle of Stalingrad discussion on a thread that was admittedly started by someone to attack Battle of Stalingrad?

What was that about censorship again? I'm confused...


Who said it was not acceptable? It seems an observation has been made

#4052178 - 12/17/14 05:52 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: SharpeXB]  
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 601
SkullBiscuit Offline
Member
SkullBiscuit  Offline
Member

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 601
USA
Originally Posted By: SharpeXB
Originally Posted By: Sunchaser
We have been subjected to a blitz from some from the BOS forums

So it's not acceptable on this forum to post opinions about Battle of Stalingrad on a section dedicated to Battle of Stalingrad discussion on a thread that was admittedly started by someone to attack Battle of Stalingrad?

What was that about censorship again? I'm confused...


What's confusing to me (at least someone that claims sentience) and a modest amount of intelligence

Is how you can continue to post the same tired ole stuff over and over again...expecting to change people's minds while providing no evidence to refute detractors claims or support your own

It's bot-like behavior you seemingly are engaging in...hence my reference to "sentience"...and its importance and of which I define here as at least having "self awareness"


Just for the record....I'd be a Bingo right now had I been allowed to keep my Spring Butt Bingo card biggrin


AMD 8 core at 4.7Ghz
16GB Ram
GTX 970 4GB
Sim on SSD
Win 7 64bit
#4052188 - 12/17/14 06:06 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: lokitexas]  
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 257
Itkovian Offline
Member
Itkovian  Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 257
Originally Posted By: lokitexas

If the answer from 777/1c on the DN is satisfactory for you great. At the same time, if you eat Subway you can lose 300 pounds. If you buy a Ford truck you can haul an airplane. If you drink Bud Light you are a party stud. If you wear Nikes you can dunk like Jordan.

Just saying its called marketing. It is what a company does to sell you a product or idea. Some truth, some extended truth, and there is always the fine print.


Hum, I chose not to beleive the conspiracy theories in this case... mostly because what they said made sense.

Let's look at the facts:

1- We _know_ that the CloD engine is a mess. There's no arguing that. It may have awesome capabilities and potential, but it is a mess. That's why it's still broken after their latest patch and most likely why they gave up on the game. That TF managed to mod it into good working shape (and they sure did, love their work) does not mean they fixed the engine. It's still a mess.

2- We _know_ that the DN engine is stable and well polished. Yes, it has limitations, but it also does _everything_ the devs said in that answer (detailed FM, DM, physics, and so on). It absolutely does, and I don't think there is _any_ valid argument against that. We can see it quite well in RoF. Does it have limits and flaws? It does, but that has nothing to do with the dev answer to the question.

So yes, the dev answer was completely honest, and I'm not sure how some have managed to shoehorn some sort of conspiracy theory into it.

Hell, their answer is basically "the DN engine is a good engine, it works well, and we can quickly make a new sim with it." I'm not sure how they could have been any more honest about it.

Incidentally, I suffer from the sound bug when getting hit. That doesn't mean BoS isn't a complete well polished product, particularly at this stage in its life cycle. If any bug means it's not working, then no PC game ever works.

Maybe we have different standards, but you're never going to get perfection in PC gaming (heck, even console gamess struggle with this these days).

For me CLoD with TF is now a working sim, I'm loving it... but I'm under no delusion that it's in a better state than BoS. It's still a buggy cludgy mess that should give any GUI designer heart attacks on even glancing at the screen. But BoS is in a way better state than CloD ever was, and is indeed well polished.

Which goes back to the dev's actual answer. It's by going with DN they were able to make a new sim that is that stable and polished in that little time.

Would waiting 2 more years for 1C/777 to fix the CloD engine have meant a better end product? Maybe, maybe not. It's hard to tell without really knowing the state of the source code (if major refactoring is needed, then it may not have been realistic in the first place). But what is certain is that it wasn't what 1C/777 could afford to do (time is money, and so on): they needed a good stable engine from the get go, and that's why they used DN.

#4052192 - 12/17/14 06:15 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: Itkovian]  
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 443
bongodriver Offline
Member
bongodriver  Offline
Member

Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 443
England
Quote:
1- We _know_ that the CloD engine is a mess. There's no arguing that. It may have awesome capabilities and potential, but it is a mess. That's why it's still broken after their latest patch and most likely why they gave up on the game. That TF managed to mod it into good working shape (and they sure did, love their work) does not mean they fixed the engine. It's still a mess.


Actually what TF did was prove the engine was not a broken mess after all, if simply a group of modders without access to the game code could make it into what it is now there must have been a good foundation to start with.

Quote:
2- We _know_ that the DN engine is stable and well polished. Yes, it has limitations, but it also does _everything_ the devs said in that answer (detailed FM, DM, physics, and so on). It absolutely does, and I don't think there is _any_ valid argument against that. We can see it quite well in RoF. Does it have limits and flaws? It does, but that has nothing to do with the dev answer to the question.


We know the DN engine is ageing and limited, the FM's in BOS are highly questionable, the DM is simplistic visually and there are little in the way of systems modelled to get damaged, the physics on the ground do seem OK.

#4052197 - 12/17/14 06:23 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: WernerVoss]  
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 601
SkullBiscuit Offline
Member
SkullBiscuit  Offline
Member

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 601
USA
Don't forget the limited AI entity count in BoS

That fact alone looks to keep this game (for the SP crowd) to be little more than a shiney QMB generator (provided you keep it down to 12 or fewer entities in the active space at one time)

So even if the graphics presets are taken away, AND unlocks are taken away ---and they'll be pie in the sky by and by biggrin

You will in a best case scenario with all bugs squashed be limited to a very small number of active AI within the active battle space....maybe that was ok for RoF and WWI....but I don't see how you work yourself out of that one with WWII

Last edited by SkullBiscuit; 12/17/14 06:24 PM.

AMD 8 core at 4.7Ghz
16GB Ram
GTX 970 4GB
Sim on SSD
Win 7 64bit
#4052206 - 12/17/14 06:36 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: WernerVoss]  
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 583
3instein Offline
Member
3instein  Offline
Member

Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 583
Falkirk,Scotland
We talk about the CloD engine but what is the name of that engine, is it just used for that sim, or is it used elsewhere?

For myself, both games work fine, each with it's good points and bad but TBH I really think they are pushing it with the BoS engine, even though it runs smooth and looks pretty good, but along with the barren environment you just get the feeling of "they should be more happening here" but also feel that if there was to be more it would break somehow.

CloD runs smooth for me as well and I do get a better feeling of scale, up in the clouds looking over to the far off coastline of France is really cool, but to fire it up and get running seems like a chore somehow, it just feels unfinished and clunky to me, even though I've had great times with it.

So with what's on the table just now, what is, or what could be the answer regarding decent flight sim engines? Especially for the next few years to come.I just hope that DCS EDGE is going to be all that it is cracked up to be.

Mick. smile


"An appeaser is someone who feeds the crocodile hoping he will be eaten last"

Winston Churchill

#4052234 - 12/17/14 07:25 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: Sunchaser]  
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,619
CyBerkut Online content
Administrator
CyBerkut  Online Content
Administrator
Hotshot

Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,619
Florida
Originally Posted By: Sunchaser

Something that may lead to a slap on the hand or more drastic repercussions:
We have been subjected to a blitz from some from the BOS forums, who seem to have ran out of people over there to berate or ban and they seem to have played the victim card here with success.

They seem to have convinced the moderation here that they have been misread and are in fact being unfairly picked on to the extent that they need rescuing.

Not cool, but only my opinion.


You're entitled to your opinion, but then I'm also entitled to question the validity of it. Kindly provide a link to, and a quote of, what you are referring to. Preferably keep the quote(s) in context, to save us some time here.

Before you do, you may wish to keep in mind what the rules of the SimHQ forums are:
http://www.simhq.com/aboutus/aboutus.html#agreement
Which reads in part (some emphasis added):

Quote:

Forum Registration and Use Agreement

Effective September 10, 2010

SimHQ’s forums are intended for our members to learn and exchange information about our common interests, share experiences and enjoy time spent with one another. We expect members to treat each other with respect and civility. The forums are open 24 hours a day. Our moderation is done on a wholly volunteer, unpaid basis. Accordingly, we cannot watch every post in every thread all the time. SimHQ array (“The Site”) is not responsible for any member's posts, emails, or messages array(collectively, “Postings”), including without limitation the content, tone and accuracy of a Posting, or for any material in a Posting that may be offensive to a particular viewer. The author of each Posting is solely responsible for its contents, and each viewer waives all claims, rights and causes of action he or she may assert against The Site arising from or in connection with a Posting. The views of any member, however relayed, are not necessarily the views of The Site or any entity associated with The Site or any of its advertisers. We encourage members to notify us of any Posting that may be objectionable so that we may deal with it accordingly. These concerns can be addressed to any of the moderators, staff, or the webmaster. We reserve the right to edit or delete all or any portion of any member’s Posting as we in our sole discretion deem appropriate. Your use of The Site is at our discretion and you agree to abide by our rules as they may be amended from time to time, including but not limited to the following:

You agree that you will not use The Site to post or link any material that is deceptive and/or defamatory, abusive, hateful, harassing, obscene, discriminatory, profane, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or in violation of any law, license or copyright. The Site’s server may not be used for illegal purposes or in support of illegal services, will not be used to harm or attempt to harm minors in any way, and will not be used to transmit anything that threatens or harasses another person. The Site actively discourages cheating, and the posting of hacks or cheats for any games is forbidden. You agree that you will not attempt to impersonate another person.


I'll additionally point out that when I started moderating, one of my first posts was:
http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/4041690/Re:_What_A_Piece_Of_Garbage#Post4041690

Originally Posted By: CyBerkut
Well, I see the cat is out of the bag.

For the record, I see things the same as what Murphy posted. (Big surprise, huh?)

Discuss the game, the marketing, the design decisions all you want. It's expected that people will disagree on the merits, or lack thereof, on those things. While doing that however, refrain from calling someone names or stating/implying something derogatory about them. Address the content of their posted positions/arguments, and you should be fine. If you address their personal characteristics in some derogatory way, you're not fine anymore.

People are entitled to like/love the game. People are entitled to dislike/hate the game. There is room here for both. If you think somebody's post is erroneous, and you feel like this guy:



you should be able to offer an opposing view without personally insulting them. In the long run, folks here will notice your consistent self-restraint, and appreciate your efforts.

Carry on, y'all !!! [ Singing Kumbaya is strictly optional. wink ]


I believe I've been pretty consistent since then in saying that everyone needs to be addressing the content of the messages, not the characteristics/motivations of the authors. Supporters and detractors BOTH get to have their say.

I understand that people are not happy with the implementation of moderation policies over on the official BoS forums. Furthermore, I can see why people would want to lash out at a moderator from over there, who also happens to post here. However, disagreements with such an individual need to be aimed at the substance of what they post here, not at them personally. Disagreements/complaints about the moderation policies/practices over there can be voiced here... but they need to be aimed at policies/practices, not at that individual personally. It's an important distinction.

Now, if you still think it's applicable, feel free to show me the error of my ways.

#4052239 - 12/17/14 07:32 PM Re: Here's the question. [Re: WernerVoss]  
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,179
bisher Offline
I'll be your Huckleberry
bisher  Offline
I'll be your Huckleberry
Veteran

Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,179
Manitoba, Canada
We need to provide links for stating our opinions?

Page 18 of 19 1 2 16 17 18 19

Moderated by  CyBerkut 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
Carnival Cruise Ship Fire....... Again
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:58 PM
Baltimore Bridge Collapse
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:51 PM
The Oldest WWII Veterans
by F4UDash4. 03/24/24 09:21 PM
They got fired after this.
by Wigean. 03/20/24 08:19 PM
Grown ups joke time
by NoFlyBoy. 03/18/24 10:34 PM
Anyone Heard from Nimits?
by F4UDash4. 03/18/24 10:01 PM
RIP Gemini/Apollo astronaut Tom Stafford
by semmern. 03/18/24 02:14 PM
10 years after 3/8/2014
by NoFlyBoy. 03/17/24 10:25 AM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0