The "We are all playing with toy soldiers" - argument

[Screwface]

1 hour ago, AGPO said:

See this is exactly my point. I've worked in government, on political issues which seriously affect thousands if not millions of lives. It's the very definition of serious and even as a "neutral public servant" it's perfectly reasonable to get heated about it. My best friend works in paediatric oncology. He gets heated about healthcare policy because it directly affects how often he has to watch a child die. Playing a game, with nothing other than a bit of pride at stake with what are objectively toy soldiers is at the very opposite end of the scale of seriousness. 

That's not actually the definition of seriousness though. That's you stating what you feel people should think is serious, and what you feel they should think is less serious. No doubt many people's thoughts on what they think is serious will align with yours, but what people do or do not take seriously is down to them, and can be affected by their emotional proximity to the event as much as the "real world" scale of the event itself. The word serious has no fixed associations; it's a state of mind that people have about certain subjects, situations, events etc. 

[Kugane]

31 minutes ago, Infeston said:

@AGPO I do understand your point but I still disagree with you. Maybe we just have a different understanding of this matter. But if someone wants to treat wargaming as serious as politics or a heart transplantation who am I to judge?

I don't agree with you that these topics are objectively more serious than wargaming and that people therefore shouldn't be so emotional with this. In my opinion it is the opposite. Political topics are in my opinion where people shouldn't be irrational or emotional, because these are issues which affect a lot of peoples lives. So the people making decisions should make calm decisions. But why not being upset about a hobby? In my eyes it is more logical to get upset about a hobby being changed than other things.

In the end I just wanted to stay that no one should dictate other people how they should feel about their hobbys. A forum and a community might be a place for many people to discuss things in an open way, but for many people forums and a community are also a place where they can turn to when they are sad or frustrated. I think a healthy community should be comforting when people are frustrated and not telling them that their feelings are unjustified. 

I just wanted to say that a healthy community supports their members and gives them comfort when there is frustration and not call them irrational. Not respecting each others opinions and feelings or calling them irrational is as toxic as the people always complaining and it eventually becomes a vicious circle where people get more negative with every post. First one person complaints, then another person calls this person out for spreading negativity and after that is gets even more toxic.

If we really want to have open discussions and a friendly community, we should start by respecting that some people might get upset about miniature games or "toy soldiers" and that it is totally okay. But I think nothing is achieved by treating the people the wrong way. I just don't think telling the people to stop complaining has ever helped. I have been on so many forums and reddits for different computer games and I often see similar patterns which always end the same way,

And the only times where I really have seen that something has worked, were the times where people focussed on the concerns of the people and have respected their frustration. And I just wanted to state that a statement such as "We are all playing with toy soldiers" doesn't help to end the discussion or improves the atmosphere. There are better ways which are more respecting and appreciating, which will result in coming back to topic and having a polite and sensible discussion.

I think most people (on this forum at least) will share my opinion that the only reason a term like "toy soldiers" or "toys" is used is to lighten the mood and to have people realize that ultimately, miniature gaming is there for people to have fun/play with, not to build the perfect list that may end all world hunger.

While I agree if you told people "Hey its just tabletop miniature gaming, calm down", does not have the same impact as "Look, these are just toys, calm down", but ultimately this should serve the goal to put things into perspective.

If people do get triggered over a small matter like that and feel like they are being belittled, there may be underlying psychological issues going on. Perhaps a case of hypersensitivity or low self-esteem. People that suffer from these conditions tend to see a lot of things as personal assault. Even things that have nothing to do with them.

I personally think if we can't even call miniatures toys anymore without somebody getting offended things will only worsen. Self esteem is something a person has to develop through mental training, hardship, meditation, etc., there are many options to train self esteem. While I agree a community should be safe enough that people do not get personally attacked, I've seen people say "it is ok a community is toxic, just grow a backbone" kind of thing, which I feel is pure nonsense, I do feel as long as people respect eachother, we should be free to say whatever we like, and should be free to help eachother to see things under a more positive perspective.

[AGPO]

2 hours ago, Infeston said:

@AGPO I do understand your point but I still disagree with you. Maybe we just have a different understanding of this matter. But if someone wants to treat wargaming as serious as politics or a heart transplantation who am I to judge?

I don't agree with you that these topics are objectively more serious than wargaming and that people therefore shouldn't be so emotional with this. In my opinion it is the opposite. Political topics are in my opinion where people shouldn't be irrational or emotional, because these are issues which affect a lot of peoples lives. So the people making decisions should make calm decisions. But why not being upset about a hobby? In my eyes it is more logical to get upset about a hobby being changed than other things.

In the end I just wanted to stay that no one should dictate other people how they should feel about their hobbys. A forum and a community might be a place for many people to discuss things in an open way, but for other people forums and a community are also a place where they can turn to when they are sad or frustrated. I think a healthy community should be comforting when people are frustrated and not telling them that their feelings are unjustified.

If you meet a group of friends and you are sad or emotional about a certain thing, you don't want them to tell you that you shouldn't get upset about such trivial things and just stop being so negative. No, most certainly you want them to comfort you and be there for you. You want them to say "I understand your situation. I really do. But the way you are responding to this situation does not bring us somewhere. So try to clam down for a minute and let's discuss this in a rational manner". And this is in my eyes what a community shoud also be about. Not only a place to voice your excitement and your enjoyment of something, but also a place to voice your sadness and frustration.

I just wanted to say that a healthy community supports their members and gives them comfort when there is frustration and not call them irrational. Not respecting each others opinions and feelings or calling them irrational is as toxic as the people always complaining and it eventually becomes a vicious circle where people get more negative with every post. First one person complaints, then another person calls this person out for spreading negativity and after that is gets even more toxic.

If we really want to have open discussions and a friendly community, we should start by respecting that some people might get upset about miniature games or "toy soldiers" and that it is totally okay. But I think nothing is achieved by treating these people the wrong way. I just don't think telling the people to stop complaining has ever helped. I have been on so many forums and reddits for different computer games and I often see similar patterns which always end the same way,

And the only times where I really have seen that something has worked, were the times where people focussed on the concerns of the people and have respected their frustration. And I just wanted to state that a statement such as "We are all playing with toy soldiers" doesn't help to end the discussion or improves the atmosphere. There are better ways which are more respecting and appreciating, which will result in coming back to topic and having a polite and sensible discussion.

You can't agree that the life or death of a fellow human being is objectively more serious than the rules of Warhammer? I honestly cannot get my head around that statement but okay.

Once again, nobody is dictating to anyone how to feel about their hobby or whether they can or can't get upset about it. I get upset when fifteen strangers  lose a game of chasing an egg around a field to another fifteen strangers. It's not rational and it doesn't have any material effect on me, but I'm emotionally invested. I get that. However, if I want to vent my displeasure about said egg chasers' performance, there's a time and a place. TGA is explicitly not that place. It was set up because Age of Sigmar fans were tired of the constant negativity on other sites and wanted a place to discuss the game in a positive and constructive manner.

I ask for support from my friends when I need it, but friendship is a two way street. I don't for example show up at every social engagement including birthday parties etc and try to turn the whole thing round to me whinging about my neighbour. That would be showing a lack of concern for their feelings and without that I can't expect them to care about mine. It stops being about friendship and just becomes using people, because I'm putting my desires above all of their happiness. My friends and I are also bonded by years of mutual support and shared experience, they're not just random people I feel should have to listen to me rant just because I've had a bad day and we share a common interest.

If a friend said to someone before a night out "look, I know you're in a bad mood about X, but can we try to keep the tone light tonight because a lot of us just really need to have fun after the week we've had?" then that's a perfectly reasonable request in most circumstances. That's what the site rules are doing. If you insisted on bringing every conversation round to how rubbish X was, without ever asking for advice or trying to be constructive, your friends could then quite reasonably call you out on it. If you kept doing it regardless, they'd probably stop inviting you on those kind of nights. It would be your behaviour bringing the negative response, and therefore your responsibility to resolve it. Now yes there are circumstances where you expect your friends to rally around you and suck up your mood and behaviour, but that brings us back to the seriousness point. 

The point is, TGA was created to be that type of night out. @Ben is the guy organising something social because a group of people were in need of an injection of fun and positivity, and he's asked us to keep it light for that reason. There are plenty of other places online where hobbyists want to do the online equivalent of moping together about mutual problems in a dive bar which are a better place for such posts.

Tl;dr - If you are using a place which explicitly says it is not for venting to vent, and someone tells you to lighten up, they're not the one who needs to modify their behaviour.

 

2 hours ago, Screwface said:

That's not actually the definition of seriousness though.

I think what this comes down to is the difference between something being serious and being taken seriously According to the OED, the former can be defined as:

Quote

Serious Adj.

"Significant or worrying because of possible danger or risk; not slight or negligible."

I don't think anyone would try to argue that losing a few more games of Warhammer falls into that category. On the other hand, as an adverb seriously (as in to take something seriously) can be defined as follows, which would perfectly describe how many treat the hobby.

Quote

 

Seriously Adverb

1. With earnest intent; not lightly or superficially.

2. In a solemn or considered manner

 

 

[Infeston]

@AGPO Sorry I still have to disagree with you. But maybe let us both just agree to disagree about this point. ? 

The thing is that I mentioned in my post before that there are often no strict definitions for certain terms. But still you posted an OED term for "proving" what serious meant. And I really have to disagree with something like this. Maybe also because I am someone who works in a university field which really focusses on languages and language acquisition and it is just a personal problem for me, because is see it very often that people try to prove what a term means by posting a definition.

There a no set definitions for certain terms. Neither the OED nor any international dictionary has a monopoly on defining a term. People very often post definitions to "prove" something, but most definitions of terms are often just random and not backed up by the use of the term or actual scientific research. There are millions of definitions of the term "serious", which mean something totally different than you mentioned above. There are even more definitions for the word "serious". To name a few:

 

1. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/serious

1. of, showing, or characterized by deep thought.
2. of grave or somber disposition, character, or manner:a serious occasion; a serious man.
3. being in earnest; sincere; not trifling:His interest was serious.

 

2. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/serious

1. thoughtful or subdued in appearance or manner

2a. requiring much thought or work

2b of or relating to a matter of importance

3. not joking or trifling : being in earnest 

 

3. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/de/worterbuch/englisch/serious

1. severe in effect; bad:

2. not joking or intended to be funny

3. determined to follow a particular plan of action:

 

There are a lot more definitions about this. So naming one definition of a term doesn't prove what serious means in the end. In most dictionaries "serious" is most of the time not connotated negatively like you mentioned above. Maybe I am getting a little bit too "serious" ( ? ) about terms with my post, but this might be the reason, because my profession requires working with languages every day. So I always feel the need to clear things up. 

But back to the topic. I think the question should always be "does this behaviour help to create the intended atmosphere". And as I understand the intention behind the "toy soldier" argument and I really appreciate that the intentions are good, I just don't think that this statement will really help settle the argument or make people really calm down. Because it doesn't solve the problem.

I agree with you that a healthy and positive community is needed. But I don't think such statements and behaviour and also shaming people for being negative will result in a more positive and constructive community in the end. For me the only question I often ask myself is: "Does it work? Do I really get the intended result by saying this?" And telling people to  just stop complaining and stop being negative has never ever worked in my opinion.

If people are negative and people tell them to shut down or to stop being negative I always think about this Futurama quote:

In the end. The only thing that should matter is bringing the people together and talk with each other and not segregating them by calling them out or goof of their concerns.

But I can also be wrong. This is just my perspective on things. But don't understand me wrong. I don't want negativity to rule the forums. In fact my primary goal is an open-minded and positive atmosphere. I just often think that the methods used to reach this goal aren't always the right ones. But even on this topic there might be different viewpoints and opinions.

[Carnelian]

Infeston a lot of what you've posted about language is interesting but is (philosophically) debatable and completely unnecessary for the purposes of having a discussion on this forum. 

The philosophy of language and meaning is complex and any theories (like a lot of philosophy) will be dependant upon a specific set of assumptions about how words work and how meaning is given and unless you start right at the beginning to discuss and agree shared assumptions, you end up talking at cross purposes and won't achieve anything.

When you bring up the philosophy of language in this way to cast doubt upon something that someone has said with which you disagree, it stifles the more relevant (and in my opinion more meaningful) conversation about the behaviour that is and should be expected from users on this forum.

Tldr - This isn't a place for the discussion of how words get their meaning - this is a place for the  discussion of how awesome it is to play with our toy soldiers 

[AGPO]

Fine to agree to disagree. I've actually enjoyed the discussion and I think it's been had in the exact spirit the site intends.

As a linguistics nerd and policy writer myself I agree with you on dictionary definitions. Very often the definitions used in my academic or professional field do not match the ones that are  found in a dictionary. The quotes I used were in response to Screwface's argument that I wasn't using the correct definition and were  intended to demonstrate that such a definition was indeed valid.

I wouldn't say telling people to stop complaining has never worked. Anecdotal I know but I remember being told "you keep complaining but what have you ever done about it?" being a turning point for me in how I approached my work as a teenager. Sometimes you need sympathy but sometimes you need to hear a hard truth from someone about your own behaviour. In a more relevant vein, since it's to do with the rules of the site, I've worked at many events where people have had to be told "if you don't calm down I'll have to ask you to leave." Sadly it doesn't always work but a lot of the time it does. Indeed, often the individual's peers manage to calm them down before staff have to intervene. This goes for almost anywhere from classrooms to town hall meetings to night clubs.

If someone can be persuaded to cool it in a friendly, jokey manner before someone like @Gaz Taylor has to step in and issue a formal warning or lock a thread, then that does help maintain the intended atmosphere. If not, the thread is probably heading to locksville anyway. Either way, I'd say that the "just toy soldiers" response is generally employed as a response to something detracting from the intended atmosphere rather than the cause of it.

[polarbear]

No offence meant by this, but I think if the toy soldiers line bothers you, it's because you have a hangup/insecurity about the whole thing. Most people can make fun of their hobbies or at least have a lighthearted perspective about them.

That doesn't mean debating rules or that sort of thing isn't important. I'm just talking about the emotional response to that kind of comment.

[Infeston]

@Carnelian and @AGPO Jeah. You might be right. Maybe I have a wrong understanding what this forum is for and that is why I don't agree with most of the statements. But this might be, because I have a different understanding in what I would want from this forum. But in the end I am not a mod or the creator of this forum, so I have no saying about anything in the end. ? 

I don't know the things about DakkaDakka or other forums, because I never visited them. This is my first wargaming miniature forum I have visited in my life. 

But other than @Carnelian I really think discussing definitions and terms is really necessary for any discussion. 

I have never seen TGA as a purely rational forum only for discussion, but a place to share also emotions or concerns about the hobby. But maybe this is why I expect something different than you two. 

@AGPO I also really enjoyed the discussion. As you said you were a linguistics nerd too you directly won my heart. ? I always love debating about such things as language. But I might have misinterpreted some of the things you said before, because I didn't understand the context right.

[Infeston]

22 minutes ago, polarbear said:

No offence meant by this, but I think if the toy soldiers line bothers you, it's because you have a hangup/insecurity about the whole thing. Most people can make fun of their hobbies or at least have a lighthearted perspective about them.

Mhm. What bothers me more are statements like this. Even though you said "No offence" doesn't make the statement less offensive. I don't understand people assuming that people who are bothered by something or react emotional to something have deep psychological problems or are insecure.

Responses similar to yours would be the ones which I would find problematic in a discussion, because you don't criticize my argument, but myself as a person without knowing about me in any way. 

I have to clear up that I am not offended by your quote, because I myself don't have a problem with it.

But I find statements like "Because you react this way, you must have a mental problem or are insecure"  often very problematic and they are part of the problem the same way as overly negative comments. In the end they will only divide people from each other rather than bringing them together.

 

I am not one of the people who are easily offended so I am also not really speaking up for myself here. I see myself more as a neutral watcher and analyst. 

[AGPO]

Linguistics text books and language learning materials take up almost as much space in my home as minis. I have a very patient wife!

I think this is one of the things that's going to become increasingly important to talk about as people who were never involved in the old WFB community get into AOS and TGA. The anger when AOS came out was massive, and a lot of the community became really unpleasant. You couldn't even post pictures of minis on round bases without being subjected to vitriol and having your thread derailed into why GW and AOS were the worst things ever take 23,947. In truth though, a lot of these communities had been going this way for a long time, especially since if you didn't like a new army book you could be waiting 4-8 years for a new one, so the conversations had become incredibly circular. TGA was founded as a positive reaction to that and as such the emphasis on maintaining positivity is really important to many of us who were around at the time.

 

 

[Infeston]

7 minutes ago, AGPO said:

Linguistics text books and language learning materials take up almost as much space in my home as minis. I have a very patient wife!

I think this is one of the things that's going to become increasingly important to talk about as people who were never involved in the old WFB community get into AOS and TGA. The anger when AOS came out was massive, and a lot of the community became really unpleasant. You couldn't even post pictures of minis on round bases without being subjected to vitriol and having your thread derailed into why GW and AOS were the worst things ever take 23,947. In truth though, a lot of these communities had been going this way for a long time, especially since if you didn't like a new army book you could be waiting 4-8 years for a new one, so the conversations had become incredibly circular. TGA was founded as a positive reaction to that and as such the emphasis on maintaining positivity is really important to many of us who were around at the time.

 

 

Jeah. I think my main argument is all about "Let's talk with each other". I also think the wounds from the transition of old WFB to AoS are still there and I think we carefully need to talk to each other to address these issues.

I for myself have collected miniatures since 6. Edition Warhammer Fantasy, but the rules were so much to read that I never got to play the game. After the transition to AoS, I have played my first miniature game ever, because I only needed 4 pages of rules to start. AoS did something for me that WFB never could do. 

 

About the linguistics: In my opinion, the more I learn about language the more I learn about humans. I am always so fascinated how many conflicts and arguments are often just a result of different interpretations or definitions of words and people assuming that they are talking about the same things, just because they are using the same words. If we really all had the same understanding what words meant, I think a lot of conflicts could be solved soooo easily. 

Thats why I think it is so important to always clear things up when a conflict arises.

[polarbear]

11 minutes ago, Infeston said:

Mhm. What bothers me more are statements like this. Even though you said "No offence" doesn't make the statement less offensive. I don't understand people assuming that people who are bothered by something or react emotional to something have deep psychological problems or are insecure.

Responses similar to yours would be the ones which I would find problematic in a discussion, because you don't criticize my argument, but myself as a person without knowing about me in any way. 

I have to clear up that I am not offended by your quote, because I myself don't have a problem with it.

But I find statements like "Because you react this way, you must have a mental problem or are insecure"  often very problematic and they are part of the problem the same way as overly negative comments. In the end they will only divide people from each other rather than bringing them together.

 

I am not one of the people who are easily offended so I am also not really speaking up for myself here. I see myself more as a neutral watcher and analyst. 

I'm just responding to the original post, not following the rest of the thread so much. 

I don't think it's "deep psychological problems," but maybe something people should consider about themselves if lighthearted comments about their interests bother them so much. 

From my perspective, it's obviously insecurity. Most of us have topics we've been like that about, myself included, but most of us get over those hangups with age.

I stutter, and it used to make me extremely insecure. I couldn't joke about that when I was young. Even hearing the word sent a chill up my spine. But I matured and find a lot of humour in it now and can joke and discuss it in a lighthearted way.

I would have difficulty hanging out with someone who couldn't talk about Warhammer in a lighthearted manner. I don't believe in coddling overly sensitive people. They're the ones who need to change, for their own sake. And I'm talking about a younger version of myself with that comment.

Doesn't mean I'm advocating negativity. I'm just not going to walk on eggshells because calling Warhammer toy soldiers triggers someone. 

[Bananaman]

I turn 40 in a couple of months. I play with toy soldiers. I love it. 

 

I've been at it since I could walk - Star Wars, Transformers then aged 10 I got into Warhammer. Still playing with toy soldiers, still loving it. 

 

 

[kuroyume]

On 5/26/2018 at 8:01 AM, Infeston said:

"Hey everyone. Stop being emotional or aggressive about some topic. We are all just playing with little toy soldiers at the end". 

This is just people running out of arguments and pulling out the good old ad hominem. Since they can't refute the argument, they attack the character of the poster.

[Infeston]

20 minutes ago, Bananaman said:

I turn 40 in a couple of months. I play with toy soldiers. I love it. 

 

I've been at it since I could walk - Star Wars, Transformers then aged 10 I got into Warhammer. Still playing with toy soldiers, still loving it. 

 

 

I feel you. I really love it and i still get excited as much as I was a kid. I sometimes don't understand why people start giving up such things as they get older. 

But I would also see it as a form of art, if we would use a "broader" term, which restricts art not only to fancy paintings. I would even see this as a form of art which is different from other art forms, because it is interactive art which you can use to play with. 

Most art in museums is not interactive. But miniature gaming is an art form which interacts with the viewer, which changes through the course of a game and which can be constructed differently everytime. 

So I can agree on the one hand "yes" miniatures can be toy soldiers, but I myself see them also as a form of art, which you can participate in. And I really like the definition as wargaming and tabletop as an art form for myself. Many people will propably disagree. But everytime I play a battle with beautiful constructed terrain and wonderfully painted miniatures I always treat this scene as a living painting, which changes with every round. I very often use a camera to catch different perspectives of the battle. 

So in my eyes I always treat wargaming as an interactive painting, which I am painting together with my battle partner. But maybe I see it this way only because I am a narrative gamer. ? 

[AGPO]

9 minutes ago, kuroyume said:

This is just people running out of arguments and pulling out the good old ad hominem. Since they can't refute the argument, they attack the character of the poster.

Or alternatively, people who don't want their friendly discussion to devolve into hostility because of a couple of posters. Most of the time, it's another member of the community or a mod who's telling people to cool it, not the people arguing.

[kuroyume]

1 minute ago, AGPO said:

Or alternatively, people who don't want their friendly discussion to devolve into hostility because of a couple of posters.

That doesn't invalidate my point. Instead of attacking the argument they are attacking the poster. It's intellectually dishonest and lazy.

[Gaz Taylor]

+++ Mod Hat On +++

I think this thread has run its course now. Locking