a blurred line

[Khaki]

At what point does a topic depart from the 'compass' of the Great War, obviously a WW2 tank, for example, is not within the orbit of Great War discussion but something that links an object/person with the GW seems to be OK. Am I on the right track?

For example, discussion of Hermann Goering's GW service would be relevant, but WW2 service would be "off topic", what of the in-betweens such as German Freikorps and veterans organizations, where do they fit in?

khaki

[John_Hartley]

I suppose it depends on the mood of the mods.

[bruce]

A moody bunch, those Mods!

Bruce

[Stoppage Drill]

A question I have often contemplated; history isn't compartmentalised.

The way Montgomery conducted his WW2 campaigns drew on his experiences in WW1, for example. It is definitely kosher, in my book, to reflect on the consequences of the earlier war.

But I suppose there has to be a dividing line somewhere - I would be happy to just keep pushing it, and let the mods do their thing.

It's their site.

[spof]

A moody bunch, those Mods!

Bruce

Indeed we are so I'd like to thank Bruce for volunteering to 'meet and greet' everyone at the Conference while Alan puts his feet up.

Glen

[Ron Clifton]

As long as there is a definite GW connection I think the mods take a fairly relaxed attitude, but if a topic strays too far they will stop it.

For those with enough posts, there is always Skindles, where the GW restriction doesn't apply, although the other rules do.

Ron

[spof]

We had an extended discussion about this a few years ago on the Ireland board. The end result was the Great War is regarded as covering the same period as CWGC i.e. up to August 1921.

Discussion about the early days of the Freikorps would be OK but discussing Montgomery's campaigns in WW2 is not - no matter how much he used his earlier experience.

Glen

[Khaki]

Indeed we are so I'd like to thank Bruce for volunteering to 'meet and greet' everyone at the Conference while Alan puts his feet up.

Glen

Maybe a good question for the conference, providing the agenda has not already been set.

khaki

[keithmroberts]

Maybe a good question for the conference, providing the agenda has not already been set.

khaki

It has been.

Passing reference to matters outside our subject to support a point are very rarely subject to moderation if they avoid politics, religion etc., but we are clear that topics should be primarily "On Topic".

That is as clear a guidance as you will ever get.

And yes, occasionally we may get moody.

Keith

[Jim Strawbridge]

A question I have often contemplated; history isn't compartmentalised.

The way Montgomery conducted his WW2 campaigns drew on his experiences in WW1, for example. It is definitely kosher, in my book, to reflect on the consequences of the earlier war.

But I suppose there has to be a dividing line somewhere - I would be happy to just keep pushing it, and let the mods do their thing.

It's their site.

It's not their site. It is ours. Just like Members of Parliament are not running the country for themselves but for us. But they are given the responsibility of marshalling common sense.

[auchonvillerssomme]

If it was the case, Isn't it more like the House of Lords?