oh man, I must say that I have lost a bit of interest in this site lately. Very little debating about WW2, all there is now is really useless fights about something stupid. Hopefully we can pull it back on track sometime.
Well SAM and also Dani that is your job. Not only are you a mod but you are cheif mods. You are in charge of the mods on the site and making sure they do their jobs. When things get busy … FW is going to have alot on his hands and the moderation is up to you all. Other parts of being a mod is coming up with ideas and starting new topics to inspire good people to join and continue the success we have had so far. Its not always easy. But IMO all the mods on the site could use a good kick in the ass. This site is what you make of it. We have alot of people coming from other sites that could share very valueable info about ww2. Talk to them get them to post on here. We have the attention we just need to grab it and use it. Try and read topics as much as you can so that when new people join you can hopefully answer some of the questions they might have about ww2. You mods arent mods just coz we think you are sweet. We hired you to do a job. That job is to make this site a place where people can get educated about WW2. You were picked because of your fairness and interest in learning.
There were many nights that I was not sure if I could do the admin job that was needed to be done. There is no shame in stepping down if you feel like you cant do it. Its a full time job you dont get paid for. But the reward is that you get to help to educate people about one of the darkest times in recent human history. War is one of the few things that shows all sides of man. Evil to Good. This is why its important to study.
ww2admin works the site. We work the forum and help in anyway we can. There are many things you can do… you just have to think. Ive always been excited about learning about WW2 and I do every day on this site. Make this site yours and something to be proud of. And when someone asks a question about WW2 tell them about this site.
If I were demoted back down to Sergeant Major and wasnt even a mod I would still want to visit the site to learn and help others to learn. This is our task gentlemen and why we are here.
This is my take and I hope you agree.
Any comments are welcome,
But not too long please
I dont think we should ban Ironman, he is a good fourm contributer.
While I find most of his remarks to be condesending, insulting or just plain wrong, and while I hate the infuriating way he cannot answer a question and constantly edits his and others posts to suit himself, I voted no.
He needs to be given a chance to reform I think. I have no idea if the Mods have ever spoken to him.
Im also not sure that this thread should be here as we are not the ones t decide.
Well on the one hand I would say yes, definately, as he is (as mentioned) condescending, rude, and a fool.
But on the other hand, much of the amusement I get from this forum is derived from his antics, so on that basis I would want him to stay.
I remain, for now, undecided.
Let him stay! After all we dont want to seem like a neo-nazi group do we? We have got a few complaints that we may seem to be pointing to that direction (you know, that guy Adolf Hitler and his sig.) So I think we should allow freedom of speech (for the most part). That is what I am thinking right now, maybe if I get some sleep I can add a bit more.
why banning him?,there is another guy who has all conditions to be banned,CAPSLOCKMAN.
Capslockman has already been banned, and was in fact a second account belonging to an existing forum member (as if it wasn’t obvious!)
Problem with Ironman is that he regularly makes misleading or downright wrong statements while pretending to be an expert on the subject. When a large number of site members actually ARE experts on the subject (for example on infantry weapons/tactics, patents or gas turbine engines) he won’t admit he’s made a mistake but instead drags up poorly written sources and quotes them out of context to “prove” his opponent wrong. Usually using poorly written english and offensive language in the process. Throughout the civilized internet, this behaviour is rarely tolerated.
I wouldn’t advocate banning him right away, but I would suggest that the current system of warnings is a bit too longwinded and weak. It takes what, 5 or 6 warnings for someone to get banned? The result is that people feel free to ignore it until they are one or two short of being banned, and it has no effect on their behaviour. Most other sites will either ban for a first offence, or issue no more than one or two warnings. In my experience this works rather better, with most trolls either reforming their behaviour (at least for a while - it might be an idea to allow warnings to expire after 3-6 months) or being banned early on. Since this forum now seems to be strong enough to survive the loss of a single member, this may be a better system to adopt.
No, he shouldn’t be banned for the simple reason that it is so amusing waiting for the next outrageous statement! Read the Walther War Machine’s Big Book of Soldier Knowledge for a laugh - a lot of the crap he writes is just plain wrong!
On the other hand, however, people like PzKpfw don’t know an awful lot about certain things, and Ironscam writes such utter crap with a sense of authority, and people believe it. Case in point: http://www.ww2incolor.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=249
I would say that he is an atrocious forum contributor, since much of what he posts is simply false. Just because he is prolific doesn’t make him good.
On the other hand, however, people like PzKpfw don’t know an awful lot about certain things, and Ironscam writes such utter crap with a sense of authority, and people believe it. Case in point: http://www.ww2incolor.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=249
I would say that he is an atrocious forum contributor, since much of what he posts is simply false. Just because he is prolific doesn’t make him good.[/quote]
I resent that. Leave me out of this by the way Man of Stoat, this thread isnt the ok make fun of PzKpfw VI thread :evil:
You conveniently provided an example of someone who clearly believes the crap he writes.
If you took this as an ad-hominem, I’m sorry; it wasn’t meant as one.
DAMMIT BLUFFCOVE THIS IS LIKE THE 3RD TIME YOU HAVE MADE A THREAD LIKE THIS. DO IT AGAIN AND YOU WILL RECIEVE YOUR 2ND FORMAL WARNING.
Dammit guys when you see something like that IRONMAN banning poll stop it or email somebody to tell them to stop it. How would you like a poll about you. Its not very nice and its up to us to decide who gets banned and who doesnt.
this is dumb, you should follow this
“think twice before you post a message” -FW-190 Pilot
You have been warned for 2nd time bluffcove.
you deserve it,i don`t know what you had in your mind when you did this topic.
Moved in here for the moment. Issue had been settled IMO.
So- Lasers on the battlefield, are we still allowed the future of firearms on this thread?
Why cant you just wear integrate nomex into certain parts of the fatigues?
or below the DPM layer include some sort of relective material. Burn through the comflage covering and then dissipate a greatly lessened form of energy into the surrounding space.
Future of Firearms? Eventually it will be sticks and stones, buit I think the next point of advacement for infantry combat will not come through weapons but through battlefield communications. Personal radios, and decent encrypted transmissions over and above distances associated iwth line of sight would vastly improve the efficeny of the average Tom.
Only noticed on OTC weekends, but things like not having to send runners woul be useful!
Yes, back on topic (before PATENTWALT comes back)…
I think that projectile wpns are here to stay - energy wpns just require too much energy, and are all susceptible to an electromagnetic pulse.
I think that we’ll see a change (back?) to the sort of calibres which were determined “ideal” at the end of WW2, but not adopted due to US influence in NATO over the calibre standardisation, to wit with similar ballistics to .280 British (i.e. in the 6.5-7mm range with an intermediate loading). Case size would of course be reduced due to developments in propellants over the last 60 years.
If a propellant which is cool-burning enough can be developed, then perhaps caseless might make a comeback (despite the breech-sealing issues), but I doubt it.
I remember reading somewhere about “nutcracker” breeches, designed to allow a higher rate of fire, the breech face was a set distance from the forward end of the chamber, the Round was held in a cut out of one side of the Breech face and the two halves of the breech seperated and then came to gether in order to load and eject cartridges.
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/Split%20Breech.htm
I also understood that one of the greatest problems with caseless ammo is losing heat from the firing process and preventing cook offs, a task normally done by the hot brass being ejected, with a number of chambers in rotation and as a result each used less frequently with time to cool, due the complete opening of the chamber between shots, the possibility to vent heat from a caseless ammunition would be increased with this design.
**
Thats right folks, Ive added two complex untested impractical weapons systems together to cure a problem that at present doesnt exist!
if instead of using the nutcracker design to increase rate of fire, you use it to allow the breech to cool, the problems of synchronisation can be lessened, the greatest challenge in using the nutcracker breech was ensuring pressure didnt escape and maintaing integrity round the seals, If we forsake (to some degree) the potential for high rate of fire and instead use the mechanism for cooling then one can sacrifice rate of fire in return for spending time getting the breech faces locked together.
You might then loose the inherent advantage of caseless ammunition - in its potential for high rate of fire. but you would still save on weight, etc and could almost have a hopper of ammuntion mounted over the breech, or “bars” or rounds without magazines to carry them, the propellant being stable etc could be mounted on sprues and just loaded directly, no need for bombing up etc!
And back to ironmans point, without the reciprocating action of the bolt carrier flying back and forth but instead two balnced breech halves in rotation then the ability to remina “on-Zero” in automatic might be increased. I say “might” because this is entirely hypothetical.
I have not patented this and I appreciate that its already in use with some grenade launcher designs