Should L&P be closed?

[Brett Bellmore]

What a wide range of polling choices: Leave it the same, or crack down further in various ways... Nothing like phrasing a poll so as to rule out anybody expressing opinions you don't want to hear, is there?

The road is so high here already some of us are getting light headed from the lack of oxygen. The last thing this site needs is even more censorship, it's got too much already. Come to think of it, the poll was right in character in that regard, wasn't it?

But I don't know why there was even a poll; You'll do what you want, I'll come here one day, 95% of the forum will have been deleted, and I'll shake my head, leave, and delete the bookmark.

 

[mike101]

Antis As Members ?

Do you guys really think there are Antis as members here? I can't say I recall any examples of that. Please don't make the mistake of believing that, because someone has liberal views of some social issues, they can't possibly be pro RKBA. I'm not just talking about myself. There are a lot of us here. "Liberal" doesn't mean you can't have an interest in guns, or a desire to protect yourself.

I wasn't a member when there was a Roundtable at THR, but, if THR can spare the bandwidth, I think it sounds like a good idea. Also, let it go unmoderated. That will give the Mods a break, and people can get it out of their systems. I realize that some people will go on forever, so maybe threads could have a limit to the number of posts, just so the server doesn't melt.

Or, if that isn't practical, just crack down on trolling posts. Maybe a warning or two, then suspension. My own pet peave was mentioned earlier by Real Name. That is, people who take a small part of what you say, out of context, and try to make an issue of it. I hate it when politicians do it, and I hate it here. It's so transparant. If we eliminate people whose only purpose for posting is to P.O. other members to the boiling point, I think things might take care of themselves.

 

[redneck2]

Jeez...I just like to hang out here because it's so civil.

If you think this is bad, you should hear how my wife talks to me...

And my friends are a LOT worse, but then they know me so they have every right....



In all honesty, this is one area you'll about have to keep open if you want THR to be around in a few years. I can only take about so much of the 9mm vs .45, best rifle for zombies, or Lee vs Dillon. As for reading the news, typically I don't bother. It's nice to have other members filter it for me and bring it here.

Politics and legal is constantly changing and bringing in new topics. Other stuff gets beat to death IMO. Also, even if I don't agree, I appreciate someone else's viewpoint. Let's me know the angle they're coming from. Most people try to paint things in black and white, and good threads here highlight the shades of grey.

 

[hso]

Brett Bellmore,

First, I honestly wanted to know what the folks here think. Not just my perception, but a real survey of opinions. If the question is never asked then no one knows what the opinions are.

Second, It was an attempt to keep things simple as possible. The 2 end points were very easy to define, No Change vs. Massive Change. I tried to hit the 2 middle positions in a balanced way.

It's easy to be cynical and complain. What do suggest as a poll then?

 

[RealGun]

Change the forum title to RKBA L&P and restrict the scope accordingly. The full scope of politics and legislation does not belong on a gun forum. Going beyond our common interests just fosters discord and political disarray. That is not actually a change, but it makes it more clear when a new thread would be inappropriate and precludes the argument that all politics is intertwined.

Discussion of election politics should be confined to the effect on the RKBA. The rest of the scope can be found on any number of internet sites. To discuss them among fellow gun owners, one can always use APS, as was intended.

L&P is not a substitute for Roundtable. If people will not use APS, then they cannot expect to discuss certain topics.

Whatever the mods and Oleg are not proud of hosting should be deleted or closed or both.

I have already made the suggestion that new threads be held in queue for approval or rejection. I hope that is possible with the software. It is less controversial to head off threads than to close those that have already attracted numerous posts. Rejecting threads would not attract the attention garnered by closure of threads that were never appropriate from the start. We wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

[RealGun]

When I see a thread closure and, assuming I bothered to read or scan it, I ask myself whether the topic or thread direction should be of particular interest to gun owners, I always find that I agree with closing the thread. The rest of the stuff you can find in many places on the internet. If there is a desire to discuss something among gun buddies with at least that in common, APS serves that purpose.

There is little to change except to deal more harshly with those who will not understand and accept that there are some restrictions and how they work. We do not need to have this debate every time someone refuses to accept the function and collective authority of the mods. If one cannot be polite enough to PM in regard to a thread closure, they are not of the "High Road" type and should go elsewhere.

The High Road means civility and good manners. It won't be anything like "the high road" if everyone is free to be a jerk.

 

[buzz_knox]

Do you guys really think there Antis as members here? I can't say I recall any examples of that. Please don't make the mistake of believing that, because someone has liberal views of some social issues, they can't possibly be pro RKBA.

We know antis monitor the site. It's not that hard to imagine that some come on in order to troll, sow dissent, etc.

 

[scout26]

I like to think of THR as Oleg's house, and we're all sitting in his living room talking. Since it's his house, he gets to set the rules for what can and cannot be discussed. I know If I have people over at my house, I don't want them to pee in the potted palms and I try not to do it at Oleg's house. If you want put on your tinfoil hat, rant and/or throw a tantrum, then expect to shown the door. If you want to calmly and rationally discuss facts and events, then I'll contribute to the debate/discussion. If I have nothing to say/contribute on the topic, then I'll keep my mouth closed.

 

[djpullen]

Hey let's keep trying new tone tactics to win the hearts and minds of the antis. You know, keep sticking your peter out there in good faith and the antis chop it off every time. Just ask our president how well that tactic works. After all, he's the expert of the tactic and you can see where it has gotten him. Taken advantage of and hated even more for it.

 

[real_name]

Hso, an alternate poll would probably look like this.

Some commie wordgrabbers are trying to take away our freedom to rant, opine and speculate here on THR by BANNING the long enjoyed tradition of L&P.
How should we squash this illegal menace?
(Long stream of smilies).

1. L&P isn't not broken, it's fine just as GOD made it.
2. L&P is too prohibitive, get rid of the Nazi guards in the towers.
3. L&P needs to ban everyone who disagrees with me, especially when I'm drunk.
4. L&P threads need to be unlockable, I hadn't finished chewing out that English guy for being a lowly subject.

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

I don't know what the answer is. But, something has gotta change. I just can't walk in here, read some of the exchanges that go on, and come away thinking that we're giving off the impression that this is the way honorable gentlemen and women conduct themselves.

This whole discussion seems very Twilight Zonish to me. I have been very active in L&P since joining this site, and the vast majority of the time the discussions stay at a very intellectual level. I don't see the pissing contests here that I see at so many other sites, largely due to good moderators. I, frankly, don't understand what some of you folks are talking about. Talk about throwing the baby out with the bath water.

 

[ArmedBear]

real_name:

That's the spirit!

If more of us will just have a sense of humor, this could be more fun.

 

[cropcirclewalker]

I have a few suggestions.

Don't come into the forum unless you have one of those new fangled computers that has an ON/OFF switch. That way instead of being forced to read all those offensive, boring, off topic threads you can just turn it off.

Nobody is required to read all the stupid threads.

Grow up about the "providing fuel for the antis" jibberish. If the banners can't find fuel for their fires here or on other gun boards, they will just make it up.

Grow up.

Some forums have the accessory to rate a string. That might be good for those of you that are thin skinned. That way you won't hurt your delicate sensibilities.

Finally, like above, set up a rating system for the mods. Bart wades into some of the awful cop bashing strings and takes as well as he receives. The Terlingua Terminator, however, just says something pithy and pulls the plug.

Give the mods some feedbacks like on ebay. Go into negative ground and you gotta have adult supervision before you can pull the curtain.

appended.......Heck, give everybody the opportunity to give every poster in a string feedback. Saves a lot of "+1" posts and would serve as a handy guide as to who to put on your ignore list. Instead of feeling the need to respond to a troll, just give him the neg feedback and let the rest of the readers see him twist in the wind.

Yeah.

 

[GEM]

One problem is that folks forget the mantra that an armed society is a polite society.

On the internet, folks feel free to say things that you wouldn't say to someone's face. A story - I had a heated debate with a gentleman on a gun list about my view of some legal issues. Rant and rave.

Thus, when we met at the NTI - the gentleman sought me out and said: We don't like each other! Thus, we shook ends and realized that we were both on the same side and great guys. We went through team exercises together.

It is easy to insult someone behind the screen names of choice.

Would you call the cop a nazi in person? Would you call someone liberal scum or Nazi pig in person?

Are you open to discussing your opinions in a rational discussion without demanding ideological purity based on whatever things you believe for the moment?

It is the characteristics of individual posters that lead to the problem. There is a book - Psychology of the Internet that documents exactly what happens here. The Internet loosens some of the social controls and context we normally have.

If one acts like adults and with normal politeness and with intellectual openess - we can get along.

I have a good friend who is religious and conservative. While working out in the gym we had a meaningful and philosophical discussion of abortion issues. We were polite.

One problem is immaturity of some posters who hide behind the Internet to rant. The other issue is that folks demand purity. Haven't we learned through history that the world is complex and things aren't black and white? If you demand such basically that's a lower cognitive style of thinking.

That's my two cents. Off to work.

 

[SuperNaut]

Eh, What Do I Know?

I'm a FNG so my opinion is worth about this |.| much.

I'm a fan of letting the conversation range where it may. That's not to say that insults and trolling and hooliganism should be allowed, by all means iron-fist moderation is called for in those cases (is iron-fist moderation an oxymoron?). Sometimes thread drift is a good thing and people should be allowed to elevate themselves with their words. Whether that elevation is a noose or a pedestal is up to the author.

This is Oleg's joint and I will abide by his wishes. However I believe that freedom brings out the best and worst in people and anyone with possession of more than two brain cells to rub together can tell trolling from an honest disagreement.

If we cannot moderate ourselves then we should be moderated.

 

[buzz_knox]

Grow up.

Part of growing up is the ability to have rationale reasoned discussion on issues without resorting to unnecessary hysterics or insults. It's possible for grownups to discuss most any topic without one person or another needing to "tune out the conversation" or "leave the room." Mind you, most people aren't grownups in that sense but we should strive to be.

Growing up also requires recognizing that when invited into someone else's home, one abides by basic standards of civility as a minimum when no other rule is stated, and also any rule or expectation the owner states.

We're all guests here. If we remembered that from time to time, there wouldn't be bandwidth wasted on ideas of how to improve the level of discourse.

Perhaps the problem exists now because there's too much discussion about what needs to be done, and less actually being done. If there are violations of rules, perhaps "time outs" would be in order.

 

[Phetro]

As anyone read some of the topics posted lately in this forum. Take a look through, there are some real gems being posted, such as these fine topics: starting your own country, or should nukes be regulated. Topics such as these should not be posted, they are a waste of bandwidth, and only end up turing into flame wars. Also their are plenty of topics that are way too radical, that make gunowners seem to be conspiracy degenerates. Topics should be regulated towards having directly to do with the politics of the RKBA and similar topics. There is also the issue of the legal topics that are brought up, some the responses would make any attorney cringe. It would be best to keep those topics off the site. I am not against having this fourm, but at times the topics do not shed the best light onto the RKBA or gunowners.

A prime example of someone suggestively urging the forum leftward. Beware such posts, that try to take the "reasonable" angle, but are really trying to silence any discussion related to topics they don't want discussed. They want to create the impression that such "way too radical" beliefs don't even exist--then others will be embarrassed into silence, and the whole forum takes a left turn. If posters like this get their way, next it will be any right-wing beliefs that are banned, because they are "offensive" to "some posters."

Give an inch and a mile will go for sure. Go ahead. Many inches have already actually been given--the moderation here is already extremely high and very much in favor of the leftists (if you disagree, try to think of the last time you ever saw a leftist post criticized by a moderator! Warning: don't hold your breath while doing this. Next, think of the last time you saw a moderator criticize anyone who doesn't trust the government or its motives, doesn't believe the future is as bright as the nice man on TV said, or doesn't fall right into step with Big Brother's "laws" sans complaint...)

At a time like this, we need more free speech here, not less.

 

[Brett Bellmore]

Second, It was an attempt to keep things simple as possible. The 2 end points were very easy to define, No Change vs. Massive Change. I tried to hit the 2 middle positions in a balanced way.

It's easy to be cynical and complain. What do suggest as a poll then?

No, the two end points were, No Change vs. Massive Change in a particular direction. What about change, massive or not, in the direction of less restrictions?

What's my complaint? Yeah, this is a private forum, and you're entitled to restrict speech here in any way you want, and to kick out anybody who grouses about it. You're not, however, entitled to have everybody agree that the restrictions are a good idea.

Threads are regularly shut down because "cops are being dissed". Well, guess what? In a country where goon squads made up of cops are breaking down doors in the middle of the night, and gunning down anyone who twitches, often at the wrong address, and almost always over non-violent offenses, any full discussion of the politics and law of guns is going to involve cops being dissed.

Because, get as defensive as you like, they're doing things that OUGHT to be dissed.

I think it's a bad decision, even if you're entitled to make it, to shut down any thread that involves people saying bad things about the police. I think this forum needs, even if we mere guests aren't entitled to it by right, less censorship on this score.

 

[Ed Ames]

I don't know what the answer is. But, something has gotta change. I just can't walk in here, read some of the exchanges that go on, and come away thinking that we're giving off the impression that this is the way honorable gentlemen and women conduct themselves.

This whole discussion seems very Twilight Zonish to me. I have been very active in L&P since joining this site, and the vast majority of the time the discussions stay at a very intellectual level. I don't see the pissing contests here that I see at so many other sites, largely due to good moderators. I, frankly, don't understand what some of you folks are talking about.

Yeah, that post was weird... and very scary when you realize that he was a moderator!!!!

The moderators on the political side haven't been using the full set of tools available to them. In other words, they haven't been doing the best job they could do. They've basically just been locking threads and occasionally deleting them altogether. These are blunt axes, and they are being used where a delicate touch is needed. A good example is the recent spate of closing of anti-SWAT threads. One moderator said, "When threads run that many posts and are closed because enough is enough, you guys should take the hint and not start again so soon." The reality is that when so many posts, and threads, are made on a topic, the moderators need to take the hint that closing the threads is the wrong approach.

There are plenty of good forums without moderators, but no good forums without users. And the argument "the antis will see our dissent and use it as ammo" doesn't fly. Every site has discord... even the most rabid anti-gun forum has members who step over the line of civility and rationality in their conversation. For every THR thread they can use as ammo, there is at least one anti-forum thread that we can use.

I still say split it...

 

[buzz_knox]

At a time like this, we need more free speech here, not less.

I would respectfully submit that we need more responsible free speech than speech itself. Quantity may have a quality all of its own, but not where rational discourse and debate are the most effective tools of choice.

This doesn't mean that any issue shouldn't be on the table, but the way in which an issue is framed and discussed is critical.

 

[anotherinkling]

It's a good place for dialogue and a valuable place for updates. The latest update on Cook County gun ordinances alone may have saved some folks a world of trouble.

 

[Lonestar]

Should L&P be closed???? Ummm depends. I think you should seperate RKBA and regular political discussion, or just make it RKBA only. Everyone has different political views, and I notice the mods with opposing views seem to shut down threads as soon as they are started, while others that support their views get to stay open. Quite frankly you can allow political debate, and as long as no one harrasses other member (trolls, name calling, etc) you can let it get heated, let them rant, but you should expect and allow opinions from people who drink a different flavor Kool Aid, and from people like myself who swore off of Kool Aid all together. With todays political climate, its almost a sure thing that any political discussion will get heated quick.

I'm assuming some good threads were closed, and maybe some good members were warned, or even banned forever from THR due to banter on the L&P. I say if THR can't take the heat, then get out of the L&P kitchen.

I seen guys that were harassed regularly by both Members and Mods on The Firing Line, with their only crime was having a different point of view or maybe being a little strange. I hate to see that happen here, or am I already to late .

 

[cloudcroft]

Yes, it should be closed.

Too many warm-and-fuzzy liberals post here.



-- John D.

 

[RNB65]

Everyone has different political views, and I notice the mods with opposing views seem to shut down threads as soon as they are started, while others that support their views get to stay open.

Unfortunately, that tends to be quite common on moderated forums. Over time some moderators tend to develop a bit of a God complex and decide it's their job to dictate discussion rather than moderate it. I've seen it happen on other sites. That's when it's time to move on to another forum.

With todays political climate, its almost a sure thing that any political discussion will get heated quick.

Few things stir men's souls quite like politics. Any time politics (or religion) enters the room, the temperature goes up in a hurry. Doesn't matter if you're talking gun control laws or jaywalking laws, tempers are going to flare pretty quick. That's just the nature of politics.

 

[Phetro]

No, the two end points were, No Change vs. Massive Change in a particular direction. What about change, massive or not, in the direction of less restrictions?

What's my complaint? Yeah, this is a private forum, and you're entitled to restrict speech here in any way you want, and to kick out anybody who grouses about it. You're not, however, entitled to have everybody agree that the restrictions are a good idea.

Threads are regularly shut down because "cops are being dissed". Well, guess what? In a country where goon squads made up of cops are breaking down doors in the middle of the night, and gunning down anyone who twitches, often at the wrong address, and almost always over non-violent offenses, any full discussion of the politics and law of guns is going to involve cops being dissed.

Because, get as defensive as you like, they're doing things that OUGHT to be dissed.

I think it's a bad decision, even if you're entitled to make it, to shut down any thread that involves people saying bad things about the police. I think this forum needs, even if we mere guests aren't entitled to it by right, less censorship on this score.

+4 (three other people I showed this to who read posts but haven't joined agree also )

I would respectfully submit that we need more responsible free speech than speech itself. Quantity may have a quality all of its own, but not where rational discourse and debate are the most effective tools of choice.

This doesn't mean that any issue shouldn't be on the table, but the way in which an issue is framed and discussed is critical.

I agree that speech should largely be free and responsible--however, in those circumstances where the two cannot (or should not) be combined, freedom should always win out over responsibility (which really means censorship in this case).