State of THR???


PDA






J23
November 2, 2008, 12:58 PM
When I joined The High Road not too aweful long ago, I liked this forum for the good people who posted, the freedom in which you could speak on just about any topic, and the great and prompt advice you receive, and the opportunity to give advice when I had an answer.

Then, I noticed some changes... and moreover, I have noticed that I am not the only one who has noticed, however, to my knowledge, I am the first person to bring this up in an open forum, though Im sure it wont be open long...

What is with the heavy moderation of keywords such as "Obama" "Socialism" "Gun Confinscation" ect? Why are the moderators acting like modern-day, internet brown shirts. The purpose, or at least the atmosphere of this forum, as it was, was the ability to speak freely about events that affect us all. Like it or not, for Obama or McCain, these upcoming elections, and any election for that matter, affect us all. It seems that we are being 'moderated,' if you will, or censored for content, especially when it applies to politics, OBAMA, gun control, gun confiscation, the liberal, socialist agenda that is about to be forced upon us [my opinion.]

As with the taverns and public meeting places of old [circa 1770's,] the internet, and wonderful forums such as this one, seem to be the only unregulated place for true 'free speech' left. Why are the moderaters, and ultimately the owners[?] of this message forum so obsessed with censorship, when the premise of The High Road, as I always understood it anyhow, was to promote liberty and be a sterling example of the high moral class of citizen that makes this country great.

If the reason is because the board is getting clogged with traffic about the upcoming elections and other related issues, then create a specific forum just for that sort of traffic. ...but trying to regulate what is being posted on these boards to purposely disclude anything to do with politics and an upcoming election, both of which are fundimentaly important to virtually every member of this board is rather contrary.

So lets discuss this topic please. From private posts, I know I am not the only one who thinks along these lines, however as I mentioned previously, I believe I am the only person to openly bring it up. Finally, if this post magically gets deleted, then I guess my questionship about censorship on THR has truely been answered.

If you enjoyed reading about "State of THR???" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Gunnerpalace
November 2, 2008, 01:04 PM
Political talk is not allowed here, near as I figure.

SoCalShooter
November 2, 2008, 01:09 PM
The primary reason is that emotions run hot and people are unable to stay civil or HIGH ROAD during the discussions. There is another forum entirely for social/political issues anyways. Not to mention the admins/mods have actual lives and expect us to remain civil unfortunetly that does not always happen and they have to be watch dogs to keep the forum from hurting itself. That is at least what I have seen in the past.

The Bushmaster
November 2, 2008, 01:09 PM
Politics, politics, politics, politics...There! I said it...Come get me...:neener:

dmazur
November 2, 2008, 01:09 PM
I'll offer my $0.02 worth, based on wild guessing. (I have nothing to do with the management of this forum)

Some shooting forums seem to be "neutral" in the area of politics. They may tolerate it rather than actively encourage it. Most draw the line at personal attacks on any candidate (probably out of fear of litigation.)

Some are so driven by this fear that they ban political content outright. Any mention of anything that could remotely be construed as political...gone.

And, if you look at the threats against various groups in an effort to intimidate them into a non-threatening position by some of the political parties this year, this concern may not be misplaced.

I try to think that the forums that are "anti politics" aren't trying to deprive anyone of their rights to free speech, just reminding us that they are trying to survive (stay out of court), and would appreciate the forum users cooperation in that regard.

But, as I said, this is only guessing.

Gunsby_Blazen
November 2, 2008, 01:11 PM
they dont allow politics here. But, right now, i think they should let it slide a bit. this is a very importaint election and the ramifications will be dire for us gun owners if one group is elected as opposed to the other. the election this year, i see, is a gun issue.

average_shooter
November 2, 2008, 01:17 PM
If the reason is because the board is getting clogged with traffic about the upcoming elections and other related issues, then create a specific forum just for that sort of traffic.

They did... it's called Armed Polite Society, or APS. Look in the upper right corner of the page, there's a link to APS, which is the "specific forum" to which you refer.

Flyboy
November 2, 2008, 01:17 PM
It's always a "very important election." We've been provided a place (APS) to discuss politics. THR is kept free of politics for a reason.

ants
November 2, 2008, 01:28 PM
J23, I appreciate your desire for an open political forum (that's the APS button in the far upper right corner of the page as noted by Flyboy and Average Shooter) but please look up the stated purpose and mission of this THR gun forum. As the founders and administrators have often said, its inspiration is a gun forum for regular law abiding people with healthy interests in the shooting sports. It is not an open political opinion forum. Go to APS (Armed Polite Society) to find the outlet to publicly debate your political views.

hso
November 2, 2008, 01:31 PM
I have noticed that I am not the only one who has noticed, however, to my knowledge, I am the first person to bring this up in an open forum

This discussion has been had before (just search for "political forum"), so you're not the first (matter of fact, it's in a sticky in Technical (http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=350166) it's been asked so many times). We've had two different versions of what you, and others before you, ask for.

They both (Legal and Political and RoundTable) turned into train wrecks because some members just turned into flaming jackasses over political discussions. Also nothing ever got "done". Endless hand wringing, chest beating, goodwinisms and venting, but nothing in the way of coherent plans to accomplish anything. INOW, half the time it was a pig wrestling contest in a septic tank or a bunch of whining and restating of the obvious (that is when it wasn't derailed completely with off topic discussions). Low to no signal to noise ratio.

As a result we decided to exclude all political "discussion" in favor of directing folks that just wanted to jaw over to APS and created Activism and Activism Discussion for people that might actually want to accomplish something to regain/protect RKBA (most folks want to talk instead of "do" something, but we do get a few who actually want to put forth some effort).

See the Forum Rules and APS to the upper right of the screen.

The Bushmaster
November 2, 2008, 04:17 PM
Besides. This is "The Choir"...We already know who to vote for...You need to work on those that think socialism is a better way to go...:rolleyes:

BullfrogKen
November 2, 2008, 07:03 PM
J23 said: When I joined The High Road not too aweful long ago, I liked this forum for the good people who posted, the freedom in which you could speak on just about any topic . . .

The purpose, or at least the atmosphere of this forum, as it was, was the ability to speak freely about events that affect us all. . .



Well see, there's your problem. If that's what you thought THR was for, no wonder you're frustrated. There is an agenda in place here, and its no secret. This isn't a place for soapbox speeches. Besides talking about our hobby and passion for shooting, we try to be an example to the world that gun owners are good, decent people. The average gun owner is not a radicalist or a revolutionary.

We're here to set an example for the fencesitters, and those who are open to persuasion.

That's not accomplished by words and speeches. Its accomplished by good examples.

I do get tired of the rants and heavy speeches by gun owners, to gun owners. We already know where our politicians stand. Those who don't probably aren't going to vote because of what they read here. Odds are they're not politically active anyway.

We had a political subforum here. The majority of the board simply avoided going in there because all people did was argue and shout at each other. Those who weren't shouting at each other busied themselves shouting about everything that was wrong in the world. The world isn't here. We are. It was non-productive and frankly sometimes embarassing. Most of the general members who remember L&P will tell you how nasty the rhetoric got.


Certain small pockets of our community enjoyed talking about the uninformed fencesitters as unpatriotic and cast them in the role of the enemy. That's no way to win friends and infleunce people. I'm glad its gone.

There are plenty of places to talk about politics on the internet. I like this place the way it is.

Bear2000
November 2, 2008, 07:11 PM
Hear hear, BullfrogKen.

jeepmor
November 2, 2008, 09:22 PM
Sig line says all I'm going to say regarding politics.

harmonic
November 2, 2008, 11:06 PM
Here here, BullfrogKen

:D

It's "hear, hear." Expression of "hear ye; hear him."

langenc
November 2, 2008, 11:22 PM
35% of the choir will vote for Obama!! minimum.

BullfrogKen
November 2, 2008, 11:27 PM
Woof, woof. Do I get a treat?

:D

cliffy
November 2, 2008, 11:42 PM
The best loads I can come up with mean nothing unless I'm "allowed" to shoot them. Not to mention hunting, if I so desire to do so. Politics are the subject of MOST importance currently. cliffy

evan price
November 3, 2008, 12:13 AM
OK Cliffy, so go to APS and talk about it.

I remember Round Table (Before I was a registered user but I browsed) and L&P (quickly stopped bothering to look in there!). We don't want or need that.

Ridgerunner665
November 3, 2008, 12:27 AM
We're here to set an example for the fencesitters, and those who are open to persuasion.

+1...that's why I like this place.

Thin Black Line
November 3, 2008, 07:37 AM
Certain small pockets of our community enjoyed talking about the uninformed fencesitters as unpatriotic and cast them in the role of the enemy. That's no way to win friends and infleunce people. I'm glad its gone.

I think repeating the mantra of "we're here to win over the fencesitters" is
not really doing much good. I've been involved at the grassroots level on
up for over a couple of decades now and it's NEVER been the fencesitters
who have EVER won an actual political battle. It has always been those of
us firmly on one side who stick to what has supposedly been engraved in
stone on the 2nd Amendment who spread the word, energize people with
the truth about what is going on and then lead the charge.

There are plenty of places to talk about politics on the internet. I like this place the way it is.

Case in point: A thread to do a process evaluation on why there are more
often crickets heard chirping here rather than vibrant discussion gets closed
less than 4 hours later (the action of which did a great job making my point):

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=403214

This is becoming a little like the local VFW where all the old-timers of one
particular war sit around drinking in their little clique, don't want to hear
anything from any of the new guys who show up (because those old guys
already know everything, of course) saying everything "works fine the way it
is here without some FNG monkeying with our calm". The new guy puts in
some effort still doesn't have any voice because he constantly gets hammered
and disrespected by the self-righteous entrenched resident clique and THEN
LEAVES. ("Good riddance", says the old guard, "don't let the door hit ya in
the butt on the way out.")

The old-time clique then sit without anyone left confronting them with a
different opinion and continue to repeat their hollow mistaken mantras to a
near empty forum. BTW, they've actually contributed to the DIVIDE AND CONQUER
game of the antigunner's themselves and no longer have the numbers to
have any real political clout outside of their little club clique. No one is
showing up, getting the word, and spreading it outside this forum anymore.

The message gets stopped dead because there's fewer good hubs left
where people are speaking. It's funny how gunowners will want a different
gun for every different task imaginable, but then severely self-limit their
means of commo (often by repeating the tired mantra of "that's what the
NRA-ILA is for...").

That's the big picture, folks.

BTW, I just love the new titles people have posted beneath their usernames
here now. I don't recall those being there a year or more ago. Maybe we
can move to King, Prince, Duke, Sir....Serf and Peon? Given some of the
attitudes here I'm sure that would gain some good traction ;-)

MMCSRET
November 3, 2008, 09:46 AM
And in summation: We are the "Milque Toast" crowd of gun forums!!!!!!

KD5NRH
November 3, 2008, 10:15 AM
Besides talking about our hobby and passion for shooting, we try to be an example to the world that gun owners are good, decent people. The average gun owner is not a radicalist or a revolutionary.

Well, then, let's send all the rabid AR15 discussion (defined easily as anything where people admit to paying or being willing to pay the price of an AR) off to arfcom, same for 1911 discussion since there's board for those. Glock owners should stay at Glocktalk, and hunters at a hunting forum, reloaders at a reloading forum, etc.

That way we can pare it down to the topics that don't get closed by overmoderation...whatever they are.

MMCSRET
November 3, 2008, 11:08 AM
Do I detect a note of "class warfare" in these lines of thought?

ArfinGreebly
November 3, 2008, 01:36 PM
Some of you may not have been here for the Great Politics Purge.

Some of you may not have had time to read Oleg's sticky describing the changes at THR from around that time.

Now, the Round Table Migration was before my time.

In the brief time I've been a moderator, I've managed to track down the reasons and causes for the migration and the purge. Kind of a self-imposed homework assignment.

I'm going to propose a flawed analogy. Take it in the spirit that it's offered. Cynical interpretations are easy, but I expect you guys are smart enough to get this:

Do you know why it is that, in a family, the parents are in charge and not the kids? Even when the kids are teenagers and have lots of life experience? Even though the kids are smart and clever and have great insight?

It's simple. As smart as they are, as clever as they are, as much insight as they have, and despite more than a decade of life experience, they have not seen enough, done enough, experienced enough, been through enough to have enough actual insight and judgment to run things.

The same applies to the military: privates are not in charge, because . . . no matter how smart, clever, life-experienced, and tough they are, they won't have and don't have enough miles to make the decisions that need to be made.

Pick any activity that requires judgment and evaluation IN CONTEXT and you will see that, while the new guy may have smarts and clevers and insights, he hasn't yet walked the miles.

It's not necessarily about age, either. I learned wilderness and desert stuff from a kid about 2/3 my age. He had the miles. I didn't. In that context, I was the new guy.

Now, I may, somewhere, have explained this, but I'll give it another go.

One of the principles of The High Road is civility. Passion is fine, argument is fine -- but attack the argument, not the arguer, and spirited discussion is invited -- but not personal attacks and slurs.

Now, that's a bedrock principle here. If you can't be civil in your conduct here, you'll be cautioned and, if you still can't be civil, you'll be gone.

Something we learned the hard way was that -- for whatever reasons -- it is simply too hard for people to be civil in political discussions. Very much like civility in religious discussions. Sooner or later, someone who's a valuable forum member is going to just lose it and brain some complete moron loser idiot waste of oxygen with a frying pan . . . and we wind up having to ban the valued member. Often we wind up banning the oxygen thief, too, but the collateral damage -- to rational, reasonable, experienced, valued members -- is often great and tragic.

Professional trolls -- really well-disciplined provocateurs -- would show up during the run-up to elections and cause havoc. The noise index in politics got to the point where moderators gave up trying to keep order in threads, and just locked them, banning offenders who threw insults or other personal attacks.

After seeing that pattern too many times in the realm of politics, we (actually Oleg and the moderators & admins at the time, I was not yet a mod) decided it would be better for the board to lose the incivility attendant with politics than to continue to lose friends and valued members because they were suckered into a serious rules violation.

I'm sure most of you consider yourselves stable, rational, reasoned people.

In the face of a person whose practiced vocation is provoking others, with seemingly "reasoned" but outrageous premises, politely-stated blatant distortions and falsehoods, it's easier than you might believe to just call the guy the name he really has earned. And suddenly you find yourself banned. For a personal attack.

The other guy might also get the hammer for trolling, but not always. Some of these guys are very smooth.

I've gone back through the archives and seen the frustration and despair among the moderators from that time. I've reviewed some of the material that led, finally, to removing politics in an effort to avoid losing any more long-time members who were, after all, simply calling a spade a spade.

You see, THR is populated largely by self-sufficient folks who don't go running to mommy and daddy every time they see something they don't like. They're more inclined to handle it themselves. They're accustomed to taking out their own trash. So, when they see a troll, they're very likely to pummel him personally rather than "whining" to the moderators.

The professional-grade trolls and provocateurs know this, and it's cake for them to pretend to be earnest and sincere and "misled" as they bait their hooks and trail them in the shallows, patiently waiting for the bite they know will come. Sooner or later, some guy with more than 7,000 posts and four years on the forum will call this troll on it, and speak his name publicly. And then the mods have to issue a warning. And, depending on just how independent the member is, and what his "suffer fools gladly" threshold is, he may simply blow up, and we lose him forever.

So, in consideration of all this, we no longer do religion and politics here.

We have APS (http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/) for that now. The moderation style there is a little different, and they've adapted to the necessities of dealing with oxygen thieves and trolls.

And, getting killed there doesn't mean getting killed here.

So we continue to have a place here where we can conduct the civil discourse of firearms, their ownership, the rights attendant thereto, their proper use, the development of the skills in their use, and so on.

We do appreciate that activism is a necessary part of retaining the right to keep and bear arms, and the Activism sub-forum was established for that.

We also appreciate the need for a place to discuss the current and pending laws that affect how and where we use firearms, so we have the Legal sub-forum.

What we do NOT have is the place where we can go to rant about politicians, stupid policies, idiotic laws, and the decline and fall of America.

We no longer wish to lose quality members to the inevitable baiting that accompanies these things.

So, really, if you MUST talk politics -- beyond actual activism -- then go to APS. The majority of the membership there are also members here. The moderators are also members here (and some do mod work in both places).

Activism isn't ranting or whining. All ranting and whining about politics and religion has been assigned to APS.

It's a decision that has been long since made and a decision what wasn't lightly made.

For those of you who took the cynical interpretation of the initial analogy, mommy and daddy have been over this territory too many times, and the answer is now, "BECAUSE I SAID SO, THAT'S WHY!"

I hope the above has been helpful.

If not, I'm not sure what I can say that would be.

rbernie
November 3, 2008, 03:27 PM
Case in point: A thread to do a process evaluation on why there are more often crickets heard chirping here rather than vibrant discussion gets closed less than 4 hours later (the action of which did a great job making my point):

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=403214
Perhaps the thread could have been useful, but with a title of, 'How did THR become irrelevant', it (not surprisingly) incited far more heat than light. And you should have seen that one coming a mile away. IMO, you were baiting and you got called on it.

The S/N ratio at THR is higher than at most any other firearms forum. I like that. That may not suit all purposes. But it suits the intentions of the forum's founders, and calling that approach classist or elitist is simply more baiting.

I've been a member of THR since 2004, and I do not see a demonstrable downtick in the 'vibrancy' of the discussions. I have seen members come and go, as happens in life in all communities.

This is becoming a little like the local VFW where all the old-timers of one particular war sit around drinking in their little clique, don't want to hear anything from any of the new guys who show up (because those old guys already know everything, of course) saying everything "works fine the way it is here without some FNG monkeying with our calm".Your argument seems to be that the imposition of standards of conduct is stifling the introduction of new blood. I call poppycock on that notion.

THR continues to have a growing membership despite assertations to the contrary. More to the point, the imposition of specific standards of conduct are exactly what I believe keep THR relevant and welcoming to the FNGs.

I joined a number of gun and RKBA related forums years ago. My post count in all of those forums together isn't a fraction of my post count here - specifically because of the mature tone maintained at THR and the willingness of the staff and members to maintain standards of conduct.

THR may be like the club of old-timers at the VFW, but the only thing they want TFNGs to do is make sure that they clean up their spills, don't curse when the doors are open, and in general help maintain the place instead of pissing on the floor and leaving it for somebody else to clean up. So long as TFNGs are willing to do that, the door's are open.

How bad is that?

More to the point - there is (IMO) little profit in having it otherwise...

pbearperry
November 3, 2008, 04:04 PM
I joined THR to exchange info on mostly Firearms.I hate talking Politics because I always end up red faced and furious esp. because I am a Conservative in Massacrapsetts.I don't like drama and namecalling however when I get angry enough I too join the fracus.And thats not good for the High blood pressure.

KINGMAX
November 3, 2008, 04:06 PM
I will be glad once the polls have closed tomorrow, this has been a nasty election process.

MMCSRET
November 3, 2008, 04:11 PM
As "GROUCHO" stated so well years ago: Any organization that would have me, I refuse to join. HHHMMMM, maybe!!!!!!

kingpin008
November 3, 2008, 04:27 PM
I will be glad once the polls have closed tomorrow, this has been a nasty election process.

Amen to that!

As "GROUCHO" stated so well years ago: "Any organization that would have me, I refuse to join."

Hey! I resemble that remark! :D

TimboKhan
November 4, 2008, 01:03 AM
It strikes me as odd that the same people who want a political forum pretty much demonstrate exactly why we don't have a political forum anymore.

What you get is extremely long posts with no particular room for any other points of view. In my experience, "vibrant discussion" usually boils down to one or two dudes shouting at each other about how the other guy is wrong. Dudes, I come to THR to READ AND TALK ABOUT GUNS. If I wanted to listen to people rant about politics and point out how stupid I am for having the opinions I have, there are about a billion other forums I can choose from. It's like some of you guys aren't really gun enthusiasts, you're just gun rights and political enthusiasts.

I am not picking on this member intentionally, but I have to respond to this:

It has always been those of
us firmly on one side who stick to what has supposedly been engraved in
stone on the 2nd Amendment who spread the word, energize people with
the truth about what is going on and then lead the charge.

I am not energized at all by this endless discussion. We have heard, in various forms, the same arguments for the last two years and it's become nothing more than a burden. This is a gun forum. By the very nature of this forum, we are all by and large pretty close politically on 2A issues, and all this constant hammering away at the choir by the preachers is not energizing, it's tedious and dull. I was glad to see the political forum go and I am glad to see the moderators shut down the "vibrant discussions" that are basically nothing more than people pissing into the wind politically.

J23
November 4, 2008, 03:52 AM
In trying to further explain my thoughts, which are oftentimes hard to deduce to written words.. I offer these two quick points.

1. Politics and firearms ARE completely intertwined whether we know it or not, or probably more accurately, whether we care to admit it or not (head in sand syndrome.) Those of you who have posted, and by the way, whether or not I agree with your responses to my original posting is irrelevant; this has been a wonderful discussion-starting post... but for those of you whom have posted replies along the lines of, "Keep politics out of the boards, let's talk guns," I offer you this, and I believe someone already mentioned it far earlier in the postings:

Loads, accuracy, which optics are best, which suppressor is most effective, magnum primers vs. standard, which bullets for deer, defense, ect., C-products or Magpul mags, ect., ect., ect. will all be moot point discussions if we arent allowed to own the guns we are talking about in the first place. Again, GUNS AND POLITICS ARE [UNFORTUNATLY] INTERTWINED, AND BURYING YOUR HEADS IN THE SAND WILL NOT MAKE IT GO AWAY.

2. And while it really isnt my place to say-I feel compelled to express my opinion. I have only been with THR for a little over a year; I am not a moderator, or even 'senior member.' That being said, I offer this: If this election heads the way I think most of us believe it's going to head, in less than two months, I for one dont care to read any previously 'restrictive' moderator [lock, lock, lock that post!] or member for that matter, who has posted any comments along the lines of 'political talk doesnt belong on these boards' pitch a fit about ANY of the consequences which arise from a far left, liberal house, senate, supreme court, or presidency.

ArfinGreebly
November 4, 2008, 03:58 AM
We DO, in fact, discuss politics.

We really do.

Honestly.

We just don't do it here on THR. We do it next door, on APS.

When I want to make a political point or see what's happening in politics, that's where I go. That's where many of us go.

And they tolerate me in spite of the fact that I'm a moderator here.

(J23, did you read post #25? Your last post doesn't seem to show any sign that you've read it.)

Thin Black Line
November 4, 2008, 07:59 AM
It's like some of you guys aren't really gun enthusiasts, you're just gun rights and political enthusiasts.


Quite frankly, I'll put my tens of thousands of fired rounds combined with
thousands of hours of unpaid volunteer time in defense of "the cause"
against anyone here who thinks I'm an armchair discussion type and can't
do both.

In fact I'll bet I'm the only person here who "distributed" a Second Amendment
oriented magazine while deployed to a combat zone. You guys should've seen
those fly out of the MWRs...One of those young soldiers could be the next
person who's a senator or rep in your state or even the POTUS. Typically,
it's been a very small handful of people in this country who lead and actually
get things done and more often than not, you'll see a veteran in the political
fray. (Yes, despite my VFW example earlier --and I am a member, I know
where the political work can possibly get done at the local level).

OK, enough of what's going to be perceived by some here are merely my chest
thumping, because what I'm trying to say is "if I can do this, surely you can do
as much where you're at." I don't have an S on my chest and wear a
cape, I'm just some guy...and so are you. Wow...feel the energy....[insert
slick multimedia lights, dazzle, sound here in order to retain audience attention]

I have to agree w/ J23 that today will be a pivotal election day and it will
have an influence on the retention of what's left of this nation's 2A rights.
I understand ArfinG's concern about holding chaos in check on THR and
sending people to APS for their political fix. If I thought most Americans
were actually capable of multi-tasking multiple websites when they usually
get their televised news from one channel, I would agree without reservation.
I think THR was capable of carrying out both missions on one website. I
think this would have made it easier for people to get both technical and
political information on the 2A. But, right now, and to use ArfinG's parens
patriae example, we "kids" on THR can't even keep our "parents" from legally
separating. ;) This will not bode well for the fight ahead that will take place
outside our household. Hence, my continued argument here for not dividing
the house. :banghead: But, yeah, why do I keep bothering? Guess, I'm just the same
dumb soldier who threw stacks of magazines in the back of my humvee....

Those of you who think things will somehow be "better" when the election
is over were either not old enough to vote in 1992 or have extremely short
memories. I don't and this feels a lot like back then and I can easily imagine
another 1994 with no sunset provision. Not a "vibrant" enough thought for
you? Yeah, guess we'll have to see how things turn out today. My observation
of other people has consistently been that they don't feel "vibrant" on the
inside until the threat is immediate, in their face, and they're thinking it came
at them "all of a sudden out of nowhere". It didn't.

In the meantime, peace, good health to all of you, vote your conscious, may
there be a chicken in every pot, hugs and kisses, and God Bless the USA. :)

hso
November 4, 2008, 08:51 AM
People seem to keep missing the fact that Activism and Activism Discussion were created to get things done and that what people are "missing" is a place to talk politics. Talking politics doesn't accomplish much. Planning to act does. That's why APS is where people who want to talk are pointed and Activism is where people who want to do something is suggested.

If you want to do something about politics instead of just talk about politics, THR has a place for that. If you want to just talk, we don't.

Gottahaveone
November 4, 2008, 09:35 AM
We just don't do it here on THR. We do it next door, on APS.

This brings up a question that admittedly isn't on topic. If APS is the "sister" site for THR and a place to have these types of discussions, why are the user names and pw's for the sites not common? Why do I have to go re-register on that site to participate? That's exactly why I have never bothered to stay on there.

ilbob
November 4, 2008, 10:01 AM
This brings up a question that admittedly isn't on topic. If APS is the "sister" site for THR and a place to have these types of discussions, why are the user names and pw's for the sites not common? Why do I have to go re-register on that site to participate? That's exactly why I have never bothered to stay on there.
You are kidding, right? It is a completely separate entity with its own rules and a somewhat different moderation policy (at least in practice it is different, the written policy might be the same).

I am not a huge fan of throwing out the baby with the bath water, but that is what whoever made the decision decided, and since they were making the decision, thats the way it is.

I personally doubt that civility in itself will bring around the great unwashed. But incivility will certainly not help.

The problem with politics is that very few of us are willing to look at our own political beliefs very closely, so are inclined to merely stand up for the politician of the party we more or less support against the politician of the party we more or less don't support.

None of the parties (including the various fringe parties) are really perfect on all the issues to anyone. You end up picking a party mostly based on your level of discomfort with the other party.

Personally I hope Americans go to the voting booth and do what is best for the country. I am not sure I know just what that is. I will say this. I went and voted this morning. It was busy. Never seen so many people at a polling place before. Not real long lines, but actual lines of people waiting to get ballots. And lines of people waiting to go to the booths and mark their ballots.

I voted for a candidate for president, and county board, a state's attorney, and a few judges. I voted to retain all but one of the existing judges up for retention. I voted for an advisory referendum to bring concealed carry to Illinois, and against a couple other advisory referendums.

For the first time in a long time, I voted for a property tax increase. Its for the local volunteer fire protection district who plan to use the extra money to hire fireman to work during the day where they currently have little coverage, a situation that I find to be sad.

The Bushmaster
November 4, 2008, 10:46 AM
I'm with pbearperry. Only I need to get angry to get my blood pressure up to normal for a 66 year old (120/70).

MMCSRET
November 4, 2008, 10:54 AM
For me at my advanced age, there are only 2 things that bring politics into my discussion: taxes and guns; and here we can not tie them together.

Jorg Nysgerrig
November 4, 2008, 11:24 AM
Why do I have to go re-register on that site to participate?

Wouldn't it have taken you about the same time to register there as it took you to make this post?

lordgroom
November 4, 2008, 01:10 PM
Arfingreebly- thanks for that lengthy explanation in post 25. It really explains a lot.

J23
November 4, 2008, 05:48 PM
+1 for Gottahaveone's statement.

Mal H
November 4, 2008, 06:28 PM
+1 for ilbob's response to Gottahaveone's statement. It was accurate.

TimboKhan
November 4, 2008, 07:57 PM
Those of you who think things will somehow be "better" when the election
is over were either not old enough to vote in 1992 or have extremely short
memories. I don't and this feels a lot like back then and I can easily imagine
another 1994 with no sunset provision. Not a "vibrant" enough thought for
you? Yeah, guess we'll have to see how things turn out today. My observation
of other people has consistently been that they don't feel "vibrant" on the
inside until the threat is immediate, in their face, and they're thinking it came
at them "all of a sudden out of nowhere". It didn't.

I am curious as to what you think that you could have added to my bank of knowledge that would have changed how I voted today? Maybe I could have voted McCain with a vengeance or punched the touchscreen a little harder.

I was in the Marines in 92, and I have not forgotten what happened then, a fact which influenced how I voted today. Does repeating the same old thing to people that are for the most part already on your side really accomplish anything? I knew what the threat was, and what I was going to do about it literally months ago. I don't think that is any different than probably 90% of the THR voting populace. If all you want to do is moan about what sucks, this isn't the forum for it and never will be. If you want to post an actual plan, go to activism. It isn't rocket science, man.

MMCSRET
November 4, 2008, 08:00 PM
In Essence: We have met the enemy and he is us!!!!!!!!!!!!

ArfinGreebly
November 4, 2008, 08:05 PM
I believe that any point that was going to be made has now been made.

If you enjoyed reading about "State of THR???" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!