|
Willo567 posted:https://mobile.twitter.com/rogue_corq/status/1641081545435000834 Well 1) it’s in Ukraine’s interest to always say they need more aid until they have enough aid to confidently win the war, and 2) it’s in Ukraine’s interest to pump out a bunch of conflicting information on potential offenses to confuse Russian intelligence.
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 18:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 15:59 |
|
|
Orthanc6 posted:Ok I did miss that addendum, maybe some of that can be bolded in the rules post to draw more attention since that is quite an important qualifier with substantial consequences. I will make it more prominent when admins finish and announce the rule properly, which I'm told should be soon. Until then, you have that blurb as your general warning that an admin can metaphorically snipe a post playing loose with combat footage.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 18:18
|
|
|
Fritz the Horse posted:don't post video where a soldier is "clearly killed" and especially don't cheer it on as epic combat footage of a Ukrainian hero with balls of steel waxing a dozen Russians For better or for worse that's almost certainly the single most iconic piece of footage of this entire war at this point. Dude's video ended up with like 9 figures of views and on basically every major news source. It's in the news now again because they got the guy off the front to do interviews.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 19:53
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:What you have missed is a recent update that included a placeholder for a rolling out rules change: Herstory Begins Now posted:For better or for worse that's almost certainly the single most iconic piece of footage of this entire war at this point. Dude's video ended up with like 9 figures of views and on basically every major news source. It's in the news now again because they got the guy off the front to do interviews. I've lurked here since the first day of the invasion and honestly the ridiculous stack of draconian rules is killing the utility of this thread. It was a fantastic aggregator that let me come in for lots of news summaries, analysis, in-depth videos, etc. But now a video that offered educational value (by your own admission!) is completely removed despite being properly tagged. I've also noticed regular updates aren't getting posted as much and hell, even front page news isn't showing up here. https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/russia-ukraine-war-news-03-29-23/h_946a8a821e4e0d76afeafe19c04aa7e6 This was top story on CNN and showing up in a lot of other news sites, but it's nowhere to be found in the thread. Ukrainians shelled the power supply for occupied Melitopol. Could that signal the possible beginning of a counter-offensive? Just a one-off for a high value target? Things like this used to get posted instantly and there'd be robust discussion. I can't help but notice the volume, timeliness, and quality of posts has decreased as moderation has gotten more strict. Granted it's impossible to say how much of the drop off could be due to people simply losing interest, but it's not the first time in this thread that I've seen the cycle of interesting information posted>well-meaning poster chastised/probated/banned>decreased engagement on topics of interest. It sucks that I can't come to what used to be a great thread to stay informed. I'd rather have to wade through a few posts of questionable content (as long as they're properly labeled NWS/NMS) than just have people not post because everything can get you a probation or ban for not following Section 3, paragraph 2, subsection 1a found on page 5 of the constantly changing thread rules. Edit: vvv Yeah as I conceded it's definitely impossible to say how much is just due to natural attrition. But having been around since the beginning I've subjectively noticed posting habits seem to change following these types of slapdowns. I mean that's kind of the purpose of doing it with the intention of cleaning up the thread, but I'd argue it's gone way past "cleaning up" to "stifling". Hakarne fucked around with this message at 20:57 on Mar 29, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 20:39
|
|
|
IDK i'd imagine the general quiet in the thread has less to do with moderation and more to do with interest. A lot of people just aren't that paying attention to the war anymore, others may be demoralized by how it's dragging on and on and throwing an entire generation into a meatgrinder they may not even win. Wars naturally lose support over time. It's a very natural pattern.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 20:43
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:IDK i'd imagine the general quiet in the thread has less to do with moderation and more to do with interest. A lot of people just aren't that paying attention to the war anymore, others may be demoralized by how it's dragging on and on and throwing an entire generation into a meatgrinder they may not even win. Wars naturally lose support over time. It's a very natural pattern. Interest has been fairly steady since ~may of last year, actually spiking substantially recently with Russia's attempted offensive (I minimally annotated the peaks)  (that's the US, the global chart is not significantly different)
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 20:56
|
|
|
Hakarne posted:I've lurked here since the first day of the invasion and honestly the ridiculous stack of draconian rules is killing the utility of this thread. It was a fantastic aggregator that let me come in for lots of news summaries, analysis, in-depth videos, etc. But now a video that offered educational value (by your own admission!) is completely removed despite being properly tagged. I've also noticed regular updates aren't getting posted as much and hell, even front page news isn't showing up here. That said, the video offered educational value only in the sense that the purpose of any interview is to communicate information. The information it communicated is relevant to trench warfare, but not meaningful for the overall course of the war, which is the objective of the thread. Consequently, it is an educational video of no value to this thread, which resulted in a compromise of fer from admin. Hakarne posted:https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/russia-ukraine-war-news-03-29-23/h_946a8a821e4e0d76afeafe19c04aa7e6
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 21:06
|
|
|
Even twitter feels like it's slowed down in terms of the amount of footage leaking out. It's no longer a constant stream showing yet another Russian tank turret being tossed. I don't know how much is the phase of the war changing / lots of the front line becoming more static, and how much is a loss of novelty.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 21:11
|
|
|
That seems premature, now that Russia wasted a significant chunk of their tanks and western tanks are starting to make it to the eastern front including Bakhmut the momentum is about to shift from Russia to Ukraine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 21:17
|
|
|
SaTaMaS posted:That seems premature, now that Russia wasted a significant chunk of their tanks and western tanks are starting to make it to the eastern front including Bakhmut the momentum is about to shift from Russia to Ukraine. Now it will be Ukraine's turn to lose armored columns to artillery and ATGM's while gaining a few hundred meters a day.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 21:19
|
|
|
adebisi lives posted:Now it will be Ukraine's turn to lose armored columns to artillery and ATGM's while gaining a few hundred meters a day. Has Russia successfully defended against a Ukraine offensive at all so far?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 21:26
|
|
|
SaTaMaS posted:Has Russia successfully defended against a Ukraine offensive at all so far? “Defended” is a complicated word here. Kherson was liberated, but Ukraine did absolutely not smash Russia conclusively there, whose army by and large seems to have withdrawn on its preferred terms for taking a defeat. Which is to say that we still have not seen the Ukrainian army perform a major urban assault against Russian sources, while we do have evidence that Russia can muster a lethal enough resistance when it digs in properly. I think that another Kharkiv-style rout would leave almost all commenters speechless.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 21:32
|
|
|
Ukraine had great success in Kharkiv, and pushed Russia out of Kherson after it was clear it wasn't tenable to defend. Both of those were before Russia mobilized more manpower and were exceptions to the glacial pace both sides have made the majority of the war. Things can always change but right now it doesn't seem like throwing a bunch of tanks at the front will be a gamechanger.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 21:40
|
|
|
SaTaMaS posted:Has Russia successfully defended against a Ukraine offensive at all so far? Technically yes, in that Ukraine has not yet managed to push Russia all the way out yet. I'm sure Ukraine hoped to go further on the Kharkiv offensive, but the Kyiv counter attack and Kherson recapture probably went about as well as they expected, if not better. But so far Ukraine hasn't had the same giant blunders in offense that Russia has had. They've certainly taken losses to all the same things; ATGMs, artillery, terrain, bad logistics, mines etc., but not so much as to stop their momentum completely during the major offensives they've launched, unlike Russia. As for news and thread activity, I'm not surprised it's dropped. I expect it will pick up again whenever the next big Ukraine offensive kicks off, but it will never get to start-of-war levels unless something truly historic happens. For example, the attack on the Kerch bridge fell well within Clancy-speculation territory and it still didn't spike activity that much. It's been over a year, most people hear any story of the war and say "Oh that's just what happens there now", humans are dumb that way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 21:44
|
|
|
Orthanc6 posted:.... most people hear any story of the war and say "Oh that's just what happens there now", humans are dumb that way. That was me and most of Europe from 2014 to 2022. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 22:03
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:Interest has been fairly steady since ~may of last year, actually spiking substantially recently with Russia's attempted offensive This is roughly how the thread activity has gone as well, e.g., I have 100 pages of posts in the old thread, and like 70 of them were made by June-July. Thread rules did also stop further developing since then, as the other war threads had found their voice by then, and the population ossified in the threads where they enjoyed posting the most – the posting environment had stabilized. As far as daily updates are concerned, the primary form of them has ever been embedded tweets, and it so coincided that quite a few of the more active posters of the updates were also interested in constantly cracking crappy memes and combat vids, or just cheering on this war as feels good/team sport type of thing, and so they settled in GBS for a little while. Ironically, these same behaviours like posting crappy memes and combat vids that I chased out of this thread was literally what got GBS thread closed. Well, predictable consequences of these behaviours, and some established posters, being insufficiently and inconsistently restrained, rather, but I digress, we will not be discussing GBS moderation in this thread. Also, I feel like I must repeat that the recent ban and today's intervention all stem out of an unannounced sitewide rule made by admins, since just seeing admins post or probate apparently doesn't suffice. In any case, the summer had left me as by far the most active single news poster in the thread, but then we had another problem, which I discovered after quitting Twitter post-Musk – I had endorsed posting tweet walls to an extent such that people were no longer interested in spending time to click into an article and read a bit. Which was basically proven during my experiment with the weekly summaries, as there was a limited interest in not just posting them (shoutout to a few goons who did), but also in reading them (1 reply per every 50 or so links with summaries provided). Another consideration was that about half a dozen regular posters had simply lost interest or burnt out, I suspect in some cases. This is the observable chronology of how we got to the current point, where I'm talking about revising link posting rules, and where I was soliciting arguments in favour of removing any specific thread rule, in the feedback thread (none were offered, but you can PM me if you have something actually specific to argue for). Further complicating things, the previous week I was on holiday, and I'm otherwise busy until the second half of May, so I'll be half-lurking this thread for the first time in a while. However, when the time pressure on my life eases up, I'll be seeing about moving these things further, hopefully, even if I'm nowhere near silly enough to try regularly posting news in the thread again. Dealing with posters who haven't learned in a year how to read, e.g., FT articles in a wide variety of circumstances is annoying enough as is already, what with demands to do some journalism warez and all. Additionally, of course, there are real-world constraints imposed on all of this, as time passes. Firstly, information availability has reduced significantly since the counteroffensives of the last autumn – the reason for that being that the difficulty of maintaining proper OPSEC is roughly proportional to the length of the “hot” frontline. Secondly, with Gerasimov ascendant, doctrine meme or not, Russian information warfare efforts have been breathed a second life into them, meaning there's a lot more sketchy stuff out there these days. Thirdly, while macroscopic Google trend is going to be quite accurate, one finer timescale behaviour is that people get bored of stuff and move on all the time, and there's just recirculation of fresh people into the topic, being prompted somewhere else for it. The only steady stream of new users on SA is the 3 permabanned guys trying to build Jeffrey a lambo, meaning that the threads can de facto attrit at a stable pace. Lastly, Ukraine simply hasn't had any flashy win in a while - Russian army's offensive petering out after it dealt seemingly serious damage in Bakhmut is not quite that. All in all, as far as I'm concerned the thread is at its most readable, and for any candid post there's normally a lively discussion, and these conversations happen whenever major stuff is happening. It's definitely getting fewer bite-sized news updates posted, but intersped with a lot of unnecessary posts they deliver much less value than one could think, e.g., since I've had quite some feedback this year that the thread still is fast. This was more or less also the conversation I meant to have in the feedback thread to an extent. SInce it was not really readable, I can't blame anyone about not posting there despite my invitation to do so, and we might as well do it now here, if y'all promise to behave and to not use this as an opportunity to comment on other threads or the site-wide moderation, unless you're feeling very brave about making an argument that cannot be made without it. cinci zoo sniper fucked around with this message at 22:17 on Mar 29, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 22:04
|
|
|
Orthanc6 posted:As for news and thread activity, I'm not surprised it's dropped. I expect it will pick up again whenever the next big Ukraine offensive kicks off, but it will never get to start-of-war levels unless something truly historic happens. For example, the attack on the Kerch bridge fell well within Clancy-speculation territory and it still didn't spike activity that much. It's been over a year, most people hear any story of the war and say "Oh that's just what happens there now", humans are dumb that way. I hope this isn't what people mean with "thread is now slow", because back then thread was doing up to 100 pages per day and I was reading it for at least 10 hours every day, of just non-stop reading, to keep up, as D&D had well over 1k people browsing it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 22:11
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/trtworld/status/1641177550515838980 If Putin can swan in and out of a NATO country without Turkey getting serious blowback (and they won't), then I think it opens up a whole swathe of the world where the leaders will be looking for any excuse to ignore the ICC.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 22:15
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:https://twitter.com/trtworld/status/1641177550515838980 Turkey had never signed the Rome Statute, meaning that I'm not even sure if there is going to be an ICC-related blowback over this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 22:20
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:https://twitter.com/trtworld/status/1641177550515838980 I don’t think it’s gonna surprise anyone that the ICC has no sway in Turkey. Putin’s visit still isn’t a great look for NATO but that’s an ongoing issue with Turkey.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 22:22
|
|
|
In the early stages of the war posting turret toss videos were certainly morbid but also actually informational in that most people didn't expect the Russian military to suffer casualties on that scale. Scorched armored columns was evidence disproving the assumption of "the second most powerful military in the world". However, I think by now it has been credibly established that a lot of tanks and people are getting blown up. We all know it happens. It adds nothing new and iinvites no discussion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 22:27
|
|
|
Owling Howl posted:In the early stages of the war posting turret toss videos were certainly morbid but also actually informational in that most people didn't expect the Russian military to suffer casualties on that scale. Scorched armored columns was evidence disproving the assumption of "the second most powerful military in the world". The most recent clear active combat footage relevance scenario was the Kharkiv rout, to be more precise. When the ball was rolling, that was literally the only way to tell “oh poo poo they're in X already??” when there was some (usually firefight) video available.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 22:30
|
|
|
I'll say that I understand and appreciate this thread being focused on relevant and recent news and modded to reduce speculation going off the rails. I'm not going to agree with where that line is drawn all the time but I'd rather participate and suck it up a bit than get kicked out. It's not a hill I care to fight on. For thread speed, I couldn't guess what the average "feel" is, but the war is slower now, even if we all know it's about to pick up again, so for myself the current speed seems fine. We'll never please everyone, I'm sure someone with a lot of time on their hands misses the crazy days cause it gave them something to do, but there's no reason right now to go back to anything close to that. Maybe it's odd for a thread so specifically focused on reporting events rather than discussion to be in the Debate/Discussion section, but this is where it's always lived... and the other subforums feel weird and scary so I wouldn't move it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 22:31
|
|
|
The one thing I'd like to do myself about the rules is to shorten them. The rules are 1200 words, or 3 printed pages, long. While I believe in all of you, I think it's only polite to concede that they could be rewritten shorten. My initial take would probably something like this. Toss the crossed out poo poo without replacement, merge the circled, and add general disclaimer that this is a stricter moderated thread. Rewrite the tagging rules to be much shorter. The idea basically is that a few of these rules have to be enforced infrequently enough that it's probably feasible to just supplant them with a modestly stern general disclaimer, reverting them subsequently one by one as and if necessary. This would be an option to halve them without making moderation any meaningfully lighter. Which is an entirely separate topic, that I am also fine with taking feedback on, if we agree beforehand that your feedback targets specific rules, and that under no circumstance this thread will be getting more lax enforcement of posting  stuff, posting about posters, or vapid cheerleading.Orthanc6 posted:Maybe it's odd for a thread so specifically focused on reporting events rather than discussion to be in the Debate/Discussion section, but this is where it's always lived... and the other subforums feel weird and scary so I wouldn't move it. Eh no, this is the same as USCE, as far as the idea is concerned, which is one of our two largest threads. Also, not to nitpick, but it's cyclic debate of the same topic that I would like to discourage, rather than discussion of what's going on – this is very much a discussion thread by definition.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 22:50
|
|
|
Also, to be clear, the feedback/meta posting window is open until sometime Saturday Latvian time. There's going to be an update post at that point, and a title change if I go big on the OP changes in the end.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 23:03
|
|
|
It's a weird turn that people get treated like children about basic war content when this is just the exact same stuff you see in every single war that has ever happened and it's never previously been an issue to just discuss them and post relevant footage. This was a solved issue in D&D and a middle ground had already been found where people were able to talk about stuff and people who didn't want to see any depictions of combat at all could simply not click anything with content warnings. As someone who dislikes seeing anything especially graphic, I'm very glad that content warnings eventually became standard ~5 years ago, but imo admins should btfo and let the thread post and discuss whatever is relevant to discussion. If people are being weird about stuff, by all means hit buttons on that, but people posting relevant footage that is content warned (eg as the rules in the op suggest, which afaict were working fine before admins got some fresh bug up their rear end) is a good standard that has been working for ages. I agree that plenty of the footage coming out of the war isn't especially relevant to much, but the current extent of the rule covers stuff that, like, middle schoolers would see in a documentary that they watch in class or you'd see in a public tv broadcast segment. Hell, that they will see. War doesn't stop being brutal just because people don't know about it or can't see it and having overwrought content rules here accomplishes basically no positive purpose that can't be solved by just putting content warnings on stuff and nuking posters who get weird about stuff (which has been happening afaik and should continue to happen). Additionally the combination of the rule in the op to not post about footage that you won't link is particularly Tldr, content warn stuff, but let people discuss stuff. push buttons on anyone being weird about poo poo. If there's literally any place on the forums to let people discuss a war, this would be it. If people moderating or IKing the thread feel burned out or want a break from seeing war content (which indeed is the healthy thing to do periodically and I heavily suggest anyone following wars does this regularly) just make some more IKs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 23:12
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:It's a weird turn that people get treated like children about basic war content when this is just the exact same stuff you see in every single war that has ever happened and it's never previously been an issue to just discuss them and post relevant footage. This was a solved issue in D&D and a middle ground had already been found where people were able to talk about stuff and people who didn't want to see any depictions of combat at all could simply not click anything with content warnings. As someone who dislikes seeing anything especially graphic, I'm very glad that content warnings eventually became standard ~5 years ago, but imo admins should btfo and let the thread post and discuss whatever is relevant to discussion. If people are being weird about stuff, by all means hit buttons on that, but people posting relevant footage that is content warned (eg as the rules in the op suggest, which afaict were working fine before admins got some fresh bug up their rear end) is a good standard that has been working for ages. As someone who mostly lurks in this thread, I agree with this 100%. Seems a little like there's a reaction to stuff happening in other threads that is leading to changes in threads that are working perfectly well as is.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 23:23
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:If people moderating or IKing the thread feel burned out or want a break from seeing war content (which indeed is the healthy thing to do periodically and I heavily suggest anyone following wars does this regularly) just make some more IKs. The rolling out change though is not initiated by any of the two of us either. I'm not going to guess where in their deliberations admins presently are, but the visible locus of it was the SAD thread about the goon who made his second post in this thread a suicide video. In any case, I'll drop this into mod forum as feedback upstream. EasilyConfused posted:As someone who mostly lurks in this thread, I agree with this 100%. Seems a little like there's a reaction to stuff happening in other threads that is leading to changes in threads that are working perfectly well as is. What got the interested in this admins to start looking, from my vantage point, was the GBS thread keruffle. cinci zoo sniper fucked around with this message at 23:28 on Mar 29, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 23:26
|
|
|
I agree it was a solved issue in D&D due to already tight moderation, but it was undeniably contested elsewhere on the forums, and whether you agree with the criticisms or not (I personally feel a lot were in bad faith, but I'm biased), they were undoubtedly driving major interforum drama. Our glorious and far-sighted admins have arrived at a tenuous compromise, which is being enforced forum-wide, irrespective of whether it was a historical issue in this subforum. We basically have to adhere to the terms of a 'posting cease-fire' - that most people on both sides are not overly happy with. The moderation feels harsh because it is - it aims to quickly tackle any violations that could be jumped upon by vocal posting minorities in an attempt to own their ideological rivals, and no-one in power wants to go back to those days. To be fair, some posters in other places are annoyed on similar restrictions on their posting (being unable to SYQing the bloodthirsty libs, make 'War is Bad' posts, etc). So everyone is unhappy with it. Its a fait accompli and probably better than the alternative. Probably. EDIT: And even if you disagree, there's nothing that can really be done about it at this thread's level by cinci or fatherboxx. If you really don't like it you'd have to take it up with our benevolent despots.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 23:34
|
|
|
Tigey posted:Our glorious and far-sighted admins have arrived at a tenuous compromise, which is being enforced forum-wide, irrespective of whether it was a historical issue in this subforum. I would like to refrain from this conversation getting ahead of the train, so to say. In part, since I would prefer to solicit actionable feedback for this thread, that I can do together with Fatherboxx and maybe the broader D&D team, and in part since the formulation of the new/upcoming rule is yet to be published. New/upcoming in that it was decided on page 385324 of random SAD thread in a scribbled post, after which a few mods did take an issue with admins that fresh bans dropping without a proper announcement from their team would be, khem, suboptimal, for which we now wait.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 23:38
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:What got the interested in this admins to start looking, from my vantage point, was the GBS thread keruffle. Right. It's unfortunate that tensions from one (maybe two, I don't know anything about the CSPAM thread) thread would cause problems for at least three threads (this one and the ones in TFR and VFW) that don't seem to have had any significant issues.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 23:50
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:It's a weird turn that people get treated like children about basic war content when this is just the exact same stuff you see in every single war that has ever happened and it's never previously been an issue to just discuss them and post relevant footage. This was a solved issue in D&D and a middle ground had already been found where people were able to talk about stuff and people who didn't want to see any depictions of combat at all could simply not click anything with content warnings. As someone who dislikes seeing anything especially graphic, I'm very glad that content warnings eventually became standard ~5 years ago, but imo admins should btfo and let the thread post and discuss whatever is relevant to discussion. If people are being weird about stuff, by all means hit buttons on that, but people posting relevant footage that is content warned (eg as the rules in the op suggest, which afaict were working fine before admins got some fresh bug up their rear end) is a good standard that has been working for ages. Also as mostly a lurker, I also agree with this. I thought the removal of that video analysis on the previous page or whatever was weird. I found nothing wrong with the war footage (and subsequent analysis) being posted because it was properly tagged. If you don't want to see graphic stuff, you don't have to. It's part of the war in Ukraine, so I don't see the issue with it being in this thread. edit: The probe over calling it 'epic' or whatever was probably warranted only because it sounded like they were cheering it on or whatever. I think that could have been worded a bit better to say 'loving crazy' or 'horrible' or anything else besides 'epic.' edit 2: VV yeah, I went back to look after I posted and I was mistaken. I edited my post appropriately. Henrik Zetterberg fucked around with this message at 23:57 on Mar 29, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 23:53
|
|
|
Henrik Zetterberg posted:Also as mostly a lurker, I also agree with this. I thought the probe for that video analysis on the previous page or whatever was weird. I found nothing wrong with the war footage (and subsequent analysis) being posted because it was properly tagged. If you don't want to see graphic stuff, you don't have to. It's part of the war in Ukraine, so I don't see the issue with it being in this thread. To be fully clear, probes were for daft “vouch fr fr no cap” posts, and entirely admin-free. Please post better than that, abstract you. The poster of the video itself remains unprobed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 23:54
|
|
|
Rusi posted a new article on lessons learned from Russia's unconventional warfare in Ukraine. https://static.rusi.org/202303-SR-Unconventional-Operations-Russo-Ukrainian-War-web-final.pdf.pdf Seems like it would be a fun read. quote:Overall, it may be said that the Russians do not have much trouble obtaining information
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2023 00:10
|
|
|
WarpedLichen posted:Rusi posted a new article on lessons learned from Russia's unconventional warfare in Ukraine. It's a great article. Cross-posting what I wrote in the TFR thread: It's interesting that things fell apart despite the critical positions some of the (alleged) Russian agents held. Brigadier General Andrii Naumov was: quote:head of the Main Directorate of Internal Security of the SBU (which supervises all SBU employees and can carry out surveillance, wiretapping and other special measures against SBU officers as part of its investigations). I think the biggest takeaway is on page 17: quote:One of the foremost causes of inaccuracy in pre-war military assessments of the likely trajectory of the fighting – both in NATO countries and in the Ukrainian military – stems from the assumption that the Russian forces would conduct a deliberate military offensive. For example, it was assumed that rail and logistics infrastructure would be targeted. Instead, because the aim was to fix and isolate Ukrainian units, there was very little attempt to destroy them in the first three days. The whole logic of the employment of forces was premised on the success of Russia’s unconventional operations and yet, as already discussed, the preconditions for that success in terms of the political destabilisation of Ukraine had not yet been achieved. There remains an unanswered question as to why the Russian leadership decided to begin the invasion without establishing the required preconditions. This may be understood as a strategic error of judgement by Putin personally.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2023 00:18
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:https://twitter.com/trtworld/status/1641177550515838980 EasilyConfused posted:Right. It's unfortunate that tensions from one (maybe two, I don't know anything about the CSPAM thread) thread would cause problems for at least three threads (this one and the ones in TFR and VFW) that don't seem to have had any significant issues.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2023 00:28
|
|
|
In other news, war is expensive according to a small Bloomberg report from yesterday. I know there's not much excitement to a piece like this, but it's one of those few data points we get on Russia's economy.quote:Russia is keeping an unprecedented one-third of its budget spending out of the public eye, a stark measure of how a year of war against Ukraine has redrawn government finances and economic priorities.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2023 00:30
|
|
|
Fair enough - got overexcited by the declaration of a period of glasnost. In an attempt to be more constructive:cinci zoo sniper posted:The one thing I'd like to do myself about the rules is to shorten them. The rules are 1200 words, or 3 printed pages, long. While I believe in all of you, I think it's only polite to concede that they could be rewritten shorten. My initial take would probably something like this. This is broadly good. The rules should ideally be as short as possible, or people will gloss over them. The clancychat/nato/nukes type rules can probably all be merged into one. They're all broadly similar in intent, about avoiding excessive speculation about (generally unlikely) future developments, and keeping discussion focused around current events. I'd personally like to see a loophole for talk about nuking willo567's balls on tuesdays, but we can't have everything. The DSA have disappeared off the radar, and the tankie moaning chat has tailed off, so is probably ditchable, and treatable as just an implicitly boring topic. Which it is. I'm not sure if you intend to delete the one about slurs. But I'd actually keep it and tweak it to cover dehumanising people, as I feel that better captures the intent and its an important principle. Maybe something like: quote:“Casual” slurs or dehumanising terms targeting anyone - such as "Orc", "Ruskie", "Ivan", "Hohol", "The Ukraine", etc - are forbidden. This is not an exhaustive list, and is not just about words - if a term (or the tone of your post) dehumanises people, you really shouldn't be doing it. In terms of process, it would be good for any significant rules changes to be clearly highlighted. For a change that might lead to something becoming bannable (like the footage thing), I would suggest it is probably best to have a temporary thread title change for at least a few days, possibly a week or so. It doesn't need to be specific about the change, but should signpost the fact there has been an important change. Ideally the changed/new wording should at least be bolded or highlighted in colour in the OP.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2023 00:33
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:That "tension" didn't just randomly happen in a vacuum, there's a certain contingent on these forms that had been looking for an excuse to stir poo poo up and if we're not careful, they'll get here too. This is borderline for extraterritorial references that I agree to tolerate for feedback purposes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2023 00:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 15:59 |
|
|
Tigey posted:I'm not sure if you intend to delete the one about slurs. But I'd actually keep it and tweak it to cover dehumanising people, as I feel that better captures the intent and its an important principle. Maybe something like: Appreciate all of the feedback, and to specifically comment on this - I feel that this comes up so rarely and should so self-explanatory that I'm comfortable risking probating for this to a possible surprise on the receiving end. To partially compensate for that, the idea is to have a general disclaimer ala “This thread is moderated stricter than others in D&D. Think of water cooler chat with colleagues to get a feel." Tigey posted:but should signpost the fact there has been an important change. That's the plan, yes, to just have “new rules since XX, Month, please read” title for a few weeks once I can say that the update is done and final for a little while.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2023 00:40
|
|