Perhaps it's time for a new forum rule ... or two

Can we look at making a rule to only discuss in threads the actual brands, models or platforms specified in the original post?

I can't speak for all the rest of the forum members, but I know I speak for at least myself when I say that one of the major annoyances in internet forum-land is when an original poster asks a question pertaining to one specific brand or model of firearm, or poses a choice between two specific brands or models of firearms, and inevitably, a fanboy of an entirely different platform, brand or model chimes in ... Generally, the discussion devolves and there's no further opportunity for folks with actual experience of the brand(s) in question to bring up valid points either pro or con.

To wit: OP asks "Looking at a mid-range full-size 1911, Springfield Armory or Kimber?"

Within three responses: "It's not a real 1911 if it doesn't have a pony on it."

Within five responses: "You really need to be looking at the Dan Wesson Valor."

Within seven responses: "Do yourself and favor and just stick to the Glock 17, the best handgun ever made."

Or -- OP asks, "Looking for a striker-fired pistol, Glock or S&W M&P?"

Within three responses: "The H&K VP series has the best trigger of any striker-fired pistol out there."

Fourth response: "Stay away from the SIG P-320 (unsaid: yes, we know you didn't ask), the high-bore axis (unsaid: most hand-gunners don't even know what that is) is just such a problem (unsaid: since I personally have never shot one, I'm talking out of my ass, but at least I'm increasing my post count).

Within five responses: "The Walther CCP is hands-down the best striker-fired pistol on the market."

Or -- OP asks, "Is the S&W M&P-15 a reliable AR for me? It's just going to be for plinking around the farm and target shooting down at my local gun club."

Within three responses: "The M&P-15 is meh. You really need to look at the top tier ARs, such as a Larue, Daniel Defense or Bravo Company." (Unsaid: you've never actually shot an M&P-15, you're simply parroting what you hear about "Tier 1 ARs" on ARFCOM and want to sound like you know what you're talking about)

Or -- OP asks, "I want to buy a home defense handgun and my budget is $500, any ideas? I'm looking at Taurus or Ruger pistols."

Within three responses: "Stay away from Taurus, my buddy had one and it was a jammomatic, plus everybody knows their customer service sucked for a long time (unsaid: even though I've never owned one or even shot one) ... You need to pony up a couple hundred extra bucks and just get a Glock, everybody has one."

Okay, I'll confess to my curmudgeon status. It just seems as though most posts about guns are turning into fanboys sticking up for their favorite platforms or just trying to wordsmith their posts to sound as pithy or knowledgeable as possible.

We're sure not gonna attract any potential, or new gun owners with these types of responses. I get that everyone wants to come across as though they know what they're talking about, but sometimes, maybe, more reading, less posting, or letting those with something productive to say post, will further our cause a bit more.

 

Nice vent, OP.

 

What was the topic, again?

 

I rest my case.

 

I agree with you 100% except that I guess my level of annoyance is less than yours. With such a diverse group of people that we have here, we do get a number of cretins who just don't get it. If you pay attention to who the offenders are you will see that it a usually a small set of people who you can just put on ignore. You will not miss any insightful posts from these guys so there is no loss when their posts don't appear any more. You can also put on ignore people who use the very tired boating accident posts that just make them look juvenile instead of clever. Try the ignore button. You will be glad you did.

 

Agreed with OldDog, and AZAndy. As a new member, and admittedly novice firearms owner, there is SO much to learn.

It is odd that in a post about staying on-topic, that I learned that I can block people. Yet that was not what the post was about.

However OldDog, I appreciate your concern, as I have looked for different topics, and, as you state, within 2 replies comes the, "my platform exceeds yours, so why would one even ask about X."

 

That's what I want on the most regulated forum on the internet.
I bet the mods would love the extra work too.
I suspect if we all could have our pet peeves banned the site would pretty much be done.

 

Then again, suppose there is a thread

"I want something to hunt elk at 400 yards or more. Should I get a .22-250 or just stick to my .243?"

Unless it gets contentious, to me it seems that extra input is sometimes helpful. Many more times than once I've seen "never considered that"

In any event, I find it's useful to look at the post count. I tend to gravitate more towards guys that have been here a while.

Dunno how to stop open discussion without stifling everything.

 

There's a wealth of collective knowledge out there among members, just as there are stubborn misconceptions and hearsay. It's not a bad idea to use some discretion to improve signal-to-noise -ratio in the long run and concentrate in the question at hand.

The situation is not quite unlike the old, lame joke joke of stereotypes, of asking a man or a woman directions to the nearest post office. Ask a man and you get directions, ask a woman and there's a chance of counter-question of "why, do you need a stamp?" or a suggestion "DHL it's much better, you should try them instead".

 

Basically human nature, especially among males. If the conversation was conducted in a cafe sitting at a large table those who could both see and hear the speaker and those who respond on topic, then the side comments would defer as there is a big amount of "know your place" when it comes to being in public. Or has been up to now.

But on a forum, posters can't "see" each other and completely lack any indicator of age, experience, dress, or tactical beard. So you get the less sensitive spouting off about what they think they know. There is also another factor - some just like to steer a conversation into the ditch. It's amusing to them even tho the conversationalists would like to thump them. Darn kids.

And on rare occasion you actually get a paid shill hustling a different brand. As if those rabid one gun tribal fan boys aren't bad enough. The thing is - I actually work with a number of younger men and I've got at least 30 years on most of them. They listen well enough but for the most part as we get to know each other we work out who's strengths and weaknesses might be the better lead on a project. I've learned sometimes to just let them blunder into a mistake - no blood no foul - because some just can't "hear" you, they have to bang their head a bit and then it sinks in.

I don't see it much different on nets. Surfing forums and topics I see someone spout off about a topic with a slightly skewed view and it's tempting - often - but for the most part we can't fix everything, and we sure can't fix stupid. On this forum things are run as politely as possible - if not more so than any other. Take a trip over to another and you better have your wits about you. I DO go there and for the most part keep it limited because I don't want to be the sour old curmudgeon constantly correcting immaturity and inexperience. I mostly hold to what I know, and stick to fact and record. All to many just start blowing and it's of no benefit at all.

I agree, a topic starts up and within a few posts it seems to start getting derailed and off topic. I've tried to steer them back - and I find that is done rarely. If other posters would put into the conversation on topic rather than shying away then the kids and shills would get toned down and their contribution would be reduced. Letting them run amok is the real problem and it's up to us - not the mods - to enjoy the conversation and keep it on track. Calling the cops every time they spin their tires in the neighborhood isn't the way to fix it.

Talk to them - steer it back on topic - and they start learning boundaries. Otherwise a forum will reduce itself to chaos and then it starts getting rule bound and stuffy. One of those is enough.

 

I don't care what you say, Hi-Points are best handguns ever made, period.

 

I understand the frustration. I use a different plan. It's always obvious if a poster is going off topic. I just immediately skip to the next post. I don't have to read the nonsensical logic they use trying to steer everybody to the promised land.

 

If you ask for opinions on an internet forum you're going to get different opinions. I've had run away threads and you just have to ask that people stick to the original post. I've also contributed to getting a thread off topic and after realizing my fopah, apologized to the OP. It helps to add a little disclaimer in the original post as well, maybe something to the effect of, 'I'm already familiar with Glocks, I'm only interested in discussing the various sizes of the 1911'.

 

Human nature being what it is I am sure we are all guilty of this very thing. I try not to get involved in threads where I don`t know the dog being discussed.

 

For us seasoned members, such posts can often be annoying, and sometimes they are amusing. If you've been here a while, you know who knows what. But as vballz stated, for new members such posts can be frustrating when you are trying to learn something. If I want "My platform is the only one, all others suck", I'll watch James Yeager vids on YouTube. New people come here because they want to learn something, and be able to impart some wisdom and experience of their own, and do it in a civilized manner. I agree, Old Dog, it's not too much to ask. But I think the mods do a good job here, and to have to make them work that much harder will just spark more "Are the Mods too quick to hit the lock button?" threads.
I'll admit, I committed the very offense you mentioned just the other day on here, in a thread about a particular shotgun brand. I misread the OP as not having experience with shotguns, but lots with pistols. After he expanded on his experience level, I apoligized and amended my reply. To me that's where the High Road part comes in.

 

I mostly agree. If someone asked for a recommendation on a 1911 and someone says "just get a glock and be done with it"- not a helpful response. I think in some situations people who give an alternate suggestion are honestly trying to give the OP an alternative that they might not be aware of and is also better in their opinion. For example " I am looking for an entry level AR. Should i get a Sport 2 or Ruger AR556"- if someone recommends something else in the same price range that they feel is better and give reasons on why they feel it is better, I have no problem with that type of response. If they would say "just get a Colt" that is not a helpful answer.

 

Applaud the sentiment, but I think in execution it would do more harm than good. Or nearly as much harm as good. There's times when the answer is "neither is a good choice in this instance, can I offer a better option?" And we need to have that route open because more is learned that way than is learned with highly constrained "pick one of two" discussions.

Of course, as is the case in probably 90% of our frustrations, pet peeves, and fire-starters here, the VERY best answer would be if members would take the time to express their replies with clarity, civility, and good supporting information. There should be nothing wrong with alerting someone to the customer service record of a manufacturer, or that a superior option exists to two choices presented, or that expanding a budget via. a little saving might be a substantively better decision than buying something now for less money. However, there often IS something very wrong with all of those suggestions, because of how they're presented and the lack of credible support with which they're supplied.

 

We all do it, it's what happens when opinions are formed.

Why you, yourself are not immune to the "problem".

From a thread where a fellow was asking about a 422.

Nothing wrong with it, we are just the sum of our experiences.

 

For a striker fired gun have you considered a steyr?

 

So you want people to read the original post and formulate a response based on what they read without getting off topic and injecting irrelevant personal opinions?

Have you met the internet?

 

Sticking to the OP with no deviation isn't the best way to go, IMO. What if their question is wrong or not suitable for their request? For example, if someone is looking for a home defense firearm and asks "What do I choose, a Browning Buckmark or a Ruger MkIII?" I don't think it would be frowned upon to disregard both platforms and suggest a larger calibre. Someone else could be asking for a long range rifle calibre and asks whether they should get a .308 winchester or a .338 lapua magnum, would it not be wrong to recommend a 6.5 or a 7mm unless the OP specifically mentions to disregard any other calibre?

If it were me, I'd rather have honest opinions from people who might have experience where I may not. In your last example above the first response is completely valid (e.g. they jam), as reliability is one of the most important things for a self defense firearm, however the second statement recommending the Glock may not be the best. A better response would be to recommend a more reliable firearm for the same price, that way it's still within the scope of the OP's question.

 

I think someone should feed the entire archive of THR posts into a deep learning AI system, and then modify how posting works so that when you submit a "New Post" the thread is only visible to the poster and gets AI-generated responses synthesized to seem like they came from other posters. So you would get responses "from" Officer's Wife, Cooldill, Old Dog, RC, etc., though of course they would actually be written by AI. Then use the "like" feature to assess subjective usefulness, and the tone of responses to determine personality conflicts. That way the AI would learn the sorts of posts that each of us like and find useful.

At the same time, the AI could post synthesized versions of other poster's actual posts. So when someone posts that they found .22 ammo, tge people who like those posts would see a version of the same post rewritten to appeal to their personal preferences (levels of sarcasm, etc.), but the people who have no interest in that sort of post would not get a post. Glock people wouldn't be bombarded with m9 posts and the anti-PCC crowd wouldn't need to wade through "which 9mm carbine" posts.

Of course our conversations with the AI would feed into the archive as the basis for future responses, so when one person posted a review of a new gun that would allow all of the AI synthesized posters to incorporate that info into responses, adjusted for personal preference (so a 1911 person would never be presented with Glock info for example).

We would be able to post and interact on the forum without having to deal with other people. Technology solves everything!