Badgering people for classified information

[broadsword]

I mean that's how it is. This is not an utopia where everyone is bringing equal value to the table.

It may be biased but some users absolutely know more stuff than others. So why should all users be "valued" the same? Why would a pro be compared to an amateur? How does that work in real life?
Is a medical student valued the same as a doctor?

So yes, some users are absolutely more useful and thus "valued" to the forum. There are plenty of Junior Members here who know their stuff inside out. Just tour a military thread and you will easily spot them

---

Of course this doesn't mean that they are above forum rules (as we haven't seen anyone banned in this debacle) and this is due to the mod team's professionalism. I have been in plenty of other forums where if this happened to them they would simply throw the ban hammer for even daring to "question" their mate or a high value member.

I agree. As long as a non-SME brings logic and rationale to a discussion, he can't be dismissed as a lesser partner. He can bring a fresh perspective when others are only offering their ears accepting whatever is given to them. There is a reason outsiders are recruited for top posts rather than using organic boardroom bosses.

 

[coolgod]

I mean that's how it is. This is not an utopia where everyone is bringing equal value to the table.

It may be biased but some users absolutely know more stuff than others. So why should all users be "valued" the same? Why would a pro be compared to an amateur? How does that work in real life?
Is a medical student valued the same as a doctor?

So yes, some users are absolutely more useful and thus "valued" to the forum. There are plenty of Junior Members here who know their stuff inside out. Just tour a military thread and you will easily spot them

---

Of course this doesn't mean that they are above forum rules (as we haven't seen anyone banned in this debacle) and this is due to the mod team's professionalism. I have been in plenty of other forums where if this happened to them they would simply throw the ban hammer for even daring to "question" their mate or a high value member.

I'm not objecting to the fact that not all opinions are equal, I'm just pointing out Blitzo's value judgement that Patchwork has been single-handedly one of the most high-yield content posting new members that this forum has seen in the last five years which clearly demonstrates his bias and denigrates older SDF members.

I haven't been here for 5 years, but I'm certain there are new members who have posted defence-related content just as "valuable" as what Patchwork posted, they just aren't aligned with Blitzo's field of interest. For example, what makes Patchwork's posts more "valuable" than the posts by SDF members within China's Space industry? Semiconductor industry?

Obviously everyone is biased, but it would be wise to pick an impartial mod to rule on each specific case on this forum.

 

[Overbom]

I'm just pointing out Blitzo's value judgement that Patchwork has been single-handedly one of the most high-yield content posting new members that this forum has seen in the last five years which clearly demonstrates his bias and denigrates older SDF members.

To be honest I haven't been on the forum for a long time but for the time I have been, Patch is easily at the top when looking at the value per post ratio. There are others behind him, but quantitative the gap is quite big and qualitative it is even bigger

For example, what makes Patchwork's posts more "valuable" than the posts by SDF members within China's Space industry? Semiconductor industry?

Most likely he meant it for the forum's military side which is fair as the forum's primary purpose is for military discussion. Of course in the politics/econ/tech threads of the forum we easily have far more "valuable" members there (especially at the IC thread as you mentioned)

Obviously everyone is biased, but it would be wise to pick an impartial mod to rule on each specific case on this forum.

He didn't ban anyone, did he? So while he may be biased (as all of us are), but as long as this doesn't cloud his judgement then why would anyone care? What I have seen so far is a great degree of professionalism and self-control/restraint which obviously bodes well for the future of the forum

 

[dasCKD]

However, even leaving aside his already impressive track record in his time here -- or let's say if one was ignorant of it -- ultimately there is a better form of conduct than demanding evidence that coupe not be provided, and using arguments of bad faith to try to attack their credibility

If I may, I did notice a certain policy on the LessCredibleDefense reddit that I also do frequent to also get my fill of Chinese military content. Here's the rule:

Do not violate OPSEC, COMSEC, INFOSEC, PERSEC
Do not post any content which violates OPSEC, COMSEC, INFOSEC, PERSEC (or PII), and do not post or ask about anything classified. Failure to follow the rules could result in a ban.

I did think that this rule seemed heavy-handed in the past, but I think that something similar to this might be warranted on this forum. Badgering people over this, as has been noted above, can cause people to go to jail in the US. Hosting that kind of information is also very illegal and can probably cause this forum to get nuked by the feds. If we implement a policy where mods immediately delete all demands for classified information and a general ban on information that breeches any country's OPSEC, COMSEC, INFOSEC, and PERSEC, we might be able to avoid this issue in the future.

This is a military forum and people are ultimately going to want more and more information on military matters. Nevertheless, I think, considering the severity of the crimes that certain members have courted over this episode, the forum should seriously consider implementing a rule like this. Most of us are osinters here. We can't expect to just receive information that is so dangerously vital to a country's strategic and tactical prospects even if we really don't like said country. Asking for that kind of information, in my opinion, is no different than demanding that someone post their social security numbers or credit card details. I don't think our forum should be literally inciting people to commit crimes for our entertainment.

 

[broadsword]

If I may, I did notice a certain policy on the LessCredibleDefense reddit that I also do frequent to also get my fill of Chinese military content. Here's the rule:

Do not violate OPSEC, COMSEC, INFOSEC, PERSEC
Do not post any content which violates OPSEC, COMSEC, INFOSEC, PERSEC (or PII), and do not post or ask about anything classified. Failure to follow the rules could result in a ban.

I did think that this rule seemed heavy-handed in the past, but I think that something similar to this might be warranted on this forum. Badgering people over this, as has been noted above, can cause people to go to jail in the US. Hosting that kind of information is also very illegal and can probably cause this forum to get nuked by the feds. If we implement a policy where mods immediately delete all demands for classified information and a general ban on information that breeches any country's OPSEC, COMSEC, INFOSEC, and PERSEC, we might be able to avoid this issue in the future.

This is a military forum and people are ultimately going to want more and more information on military matters. Nevertheless, I think, considering the severity of the crimes that certain members have courted over this episode, the forum should seriously consider implementing a rule like this. Most of us are osinters here. We can't expect to just receive information that is so dangerously vital to a country's strategic and tactical prospects even if we really don't like said country. Asking for that kind of information, in my opinion, is no different than demanding that someone post their social security numbers or credit card details. I don't think our forum should be literally inciting people to commit crimes for our entertainment.

They would not want us to know their secrets, right? Same as some here caution against revealing too much about China's capability.

 

[coolgod]

Do not violate OPSEC, COMSEC, INFOSEC, PERSEC
Do not post any content which violates OPSEC, COMSEC, INFOSEC, PERSEC (or PII), and do not post or ask about anything classified. Failure to follow the rules could result in a ban.

Besides the fact the members who don't have a defense background can't understand these abbreviated Jargon in your rules, how does it make sense to have a rule that forbids asking about anything classified?
For example, if I ask how much thrust does a F119 engine produce, am I breaking the rule? How would an outsider know what information is classified? Obviously, if I know that information is classified, I don't expect to find the true answer on a public forum.

I did think that this rule seemed heavy-handed in the past, but I think that something similar to this might be warranted on this forum. Badgering people over this, as has been noted above, can cause people to go to jail in the US. Hosting that kind of information is also very illegal and can probably cause this forum to get nuked by the feds. If we implement a policy where mods immediately delete all demands for classified information and a general ban on information that breeches any country's OPSEC, COMSEC, INFOSEC, and PERSEC, we might be able to avoid this issue in the future.

What an extremely US-centric view, there is a reason why this forum isn't in Chinese or hosted on a .cn domain. This is because the sensitive information hosted here would get shut down already by the Chinese gov, like the other Chinese language defense forum. So hosting information that harms Chinese military interests is ok on SDF but somehow hosting information that may harm US military interests is not?

This is a military forum and people are ultimately going to want more and more information on military matters. Nevertheless, I think, considering the severity of the crimes that certain members have courted over this episode, the forum should seriously consider implementing a rule like this. Most of us are osinters here. We can't expect to just receive information that is so dangerously vital to a country's strategic and tactical prospects even if we really don't like said country. Asking for that kind of information, in my opinion, is no different than demanding that someone post their social security numbers or credit card details. I don't think our forum should be literally inciting people to commit crimes for our entertainment.

This whole forum with the exception of a couple of section is literally built on inciting chinese people to post risqué military information. Suddenly someone who claims to have ties to US intelligence community gets into a heated discussion here then we all start to focus on OPSEC? Your line of reasoning further convinces me this forum is a western Honeypot.

 

[tankphobia]

I don't think it was necessarily badgering of information that I found problematic, because really unless both sides are SMEs to begin with then they would know exactly what each side's capabilities are and what they are talking about so there wouldn't really have been an argument and instead a discussion. The conversation never dissolved into true nastiness which is so common in more contentious threads (strategic defense/world affairs).

Instead we have guesstimated J-20 Specs being put up against guesstimated F-22 specs which really contributes nothing other than chest thumping. The fact that they're arguing about dogfighting capabilities when most air battles will be BVR dominated in the future is telling of the nature of the argument. As OSINTers we can only get information that is publicly available, as such even the most detailed analysis we have will be speculation at best, we'll do well to treat anyone that is IC/SME respectfully since they could offer crumbs and pieces to the puzzle that will help us come to conclusions that would otherwise not be possible due to limited information.

 

[Abominable]

If I may, I did notice a certain policy on the LessCredibleDefense reddit that I also do frequent to also get my fill of Chinese military content. Here's the rule:

Do not violate OPSEC, COMSEC, INFOSEC, PERSEC
Do not post any content which violates OPSEC, COMSEC, INFOSEC, PERSEC (or PII), and do not post or ask about anything classified. Failure to follow the rules could result in a ban.

I did think that this rule seemed heavy-handed in the past, but I think that something similar to this might be warranted on this forum. Badgering people over this, as has been noted above, can cause people to go to jail in the US. Hosting that kind of information is also very illegal and can probably cause this forum to get nuked by the feds. If we implement a policy where mods immediately delete all demands for classified information and a general ban on information that breeches any country's OPSEC, COMSEC, INFOSEC, and PERSEC, we might be able to avoid this issue in the future.

This is a military forum and people are ultimately going to want more and more information on military matters. Nevertheless, I think, considering the severity of the crimes that certain members have courted over this episode, the forum should seriously consider implementing a rule like this. Most of us are osinters here. We can't expect to just receive information that is so dangerously vital to a country's strategic and tactical prospects even if we really don't like said country. Asking for that kind of information, in my opinion, is no different than demanding that someone post their social security numbers or credit card details. I don't think our forum should be literally inciting people to commit crimes for our entertainment.

I know what colour the queen's underwear is. Anyone who badgers me for more information needs to be banned.

Do you see the problem with this line of argument?

 

[solarz]

What an extremely US-centric view, there is a reason why this forum isn't in Chinese or hosted on a .cn domain. This is because the sensitive information hosted here would get shut down already by the Chinese gov, like the other Chinese language defense forum. So hosting information that harms Chinese military interests is ok on SDF but somehow hosting information that may harm US military interests is not?

I was under the impression that any info posted here is in the public domain. Is that not the case?

 

[dasCKD]

Besides the fact the members who don't have a defense background can't understand these abbreviated Jargon in your rules, how does it make sense to have a rule that forbids asking about anything classified?

I am literally quoting someone. More than that, however, is the fact that acronyms are common practice in military spaces, at least in English-speaking ones. If you want to know what an acronym means, just type "OPSEC military acronym" on google and see what it means. It isn't hard.

For example, if I ask how much thrust does a F119 engine produce, am I breaking the rule? How would an outsider know what information is classified? Obviously, if I know that information is classified, I don't expect to find the true answer on a public forum.

It's easy enough. Ask what the thrust of the F119 engine is to an SME. If they say that that's classified then stop badgering them for an answer.

So hosting information that harms Chinese military interests is ok on SDF but somehow hosting information that may harm US military interests is not?

Nice of you to assume my position right there. No, posting Chinese military secrets is not okay. I'll say this in case someone reading this is a part of the PLA or an engineer for one of the Chinese companies: f*cking don't. Your government has worked extremely hard to keep that information under wraps and there is no internet argument in existence that is worth winning that is worth leaking PLA military secrets to the US DoD.

This whole forum with the exception of a couple of section is literally built on inciting chinese people to post risqué military information.

Mate, this isn't my first day on this forum. What kind of posts do you think this forum gets? Pictures from airshows or parades or exercises that is publicized by the Chinese government and the rare, grainy photos taken by civilians that is too poor-resolution to be of any strategic interest to American military analysts interspersed with the rare studies on aerodynamics that is already available for access in the public domain. If there's any information posted here that could damage PLA's INFOSEC then it should be removed immediately. Any war that China has to fight against America or Japan is already going to be expensive, brutal, and bloody enough without some idiot leaking detailed J-20 and FC-31 radar models and kinematics to the bloody yanks!