25 replies to this topic

[Weebl]

s70blackhawk, on 31 October 2017 - 09:11 AM, said:

 

Coming up on 20 years in that very uniform I’m defending. 

What I find is the forum trolls who have never probably served and therefore don’t understand the pride and the reason why these emblems are actually protected by LAW! 

 

So your experience in this case is wrong. Have a nice day. 

So your problem is that the uniform is a mish mash, and the medals are all over the place? If the uniform was bob on and the medals represented what could be expected from an actual period of service, then you might have a point?

 

do you not see that the fact it is obviously parody and obviously wrong is what makes it ok?

 

if WG had an actor dressed as a member of the defence force and acting as a genuine member of the defence force, endorsing their game, I would see your point, but dressing somebody up as a generic soldier complete with random badges of rank and medals, and parodying ‘a soldier’ is clearly theatrical licence. 

 

They are not misrepresenting anything. 

[Ezz]

Wait so the war gaming badge isn't standard issue? 

[JOC469]

s70blackhawk, on 30 October 2017 - 06:36 PM, said:

 

You had read my original post in the "other thread" in which you "moderated" to "off topic" so I thought was more appropriate to post here but was removed and "moderated" in this thread by your Senior. You should understand that there isn't an issue with the WG specific emblems, but the unauthorised use of Official Australian Army Ranks, Corps badges, Rising Sun etc.. and disgraceful portrayal of an Army Officer and Senior Non-Commissioned Officer on the World's stage.

 

As stated many many times on the other thread, if WG had just not used the official emblems and just had a military looking person then I (and my colleagues at work) wouldn't care.

 

I'm glad that WG legal are contacting Defence, this is what they should of been done before this situation even arose. And if the Army Branding Manager approves this, then there is no harm done because you've done the right thing and by the law. Hence me saying this is "education" for WG and to seek appropriate approvals before WG is potentially issued a fine. I haven't raised a complaint with Army HQ (yet) as I want WG to seek appropriate approval or remove the content.

 

You can blame the other forum users (even in this thread) for the escalation to the popularity of this discussion.

 

Maybe that would have been the more appropriate action, rather than sperging on the forums? It might be worth checking through your book of rules and regulations as to what you should have done if you came across a potential breach.

 

As to the slight that your clan puts on the ADF, you go ahead and plead ignorance. Whilst you have complained ad nauseum that ignorance is not a defence for what you are bleating about, apparently it is OK for you?

 

I've had my fair share of red crayon in the past - warning points are like (a lack of) battle buddies and should be worn with pride. Maybe I should get a badge made up? I will take great care in making sure it doesn't look even remotely like a military award else you will have a(nother) coronary.

 

[JOC469]

agingtanker, on 31 October 2017 - 07:16 AM, said:

I love how the internet lawyers think they are right and everyone else is wrong.  People you have opinions - nothing more.  For actual military personnel you should be aware of the defence policy on the use of social media.  This issue should not have been raised/debated by you on a public forum.

 

OMFG - I think we might be agreeing on something. Surely this is one of the signs of the apocalypse? The end is nigh!

[Profanisaurus]

Next step you'll be AFKing games you can't win JOC.

[Banshee_Nua_Shealainne]

Thread closed

 

>Centurion_IRL