9mmepiphany, I don't know what your problem is but I asked a question about an inanimate object of which this forum has many prospective candidates who might be able to help me answer. To break it down: I have one of the first Sig P229 .40 S&W pistols ever released on the market from 1994. It was actually the second gun I ever bought. Since that time, I have bought many other types of firearms. Almost all of those I have bought since that time, which were not old designs have been changed by their respective companies, with the intention of improving the design and or eliminating a later discovered problem which arose only after the original design(s) were released to the market and used thoroughly by the public. Often these changes were introduced as new "generations", either officially or unoficially or both (as is the case with Glock). Most of these design changes were obvious and easily explained by the company and or knowledgeable sources on the internet. I had no problem finding what modiifications were made. But in the case of Sig, for some reason I never could find any design changes made since 1994 to address any needs in the arena of strengthening any weak spots and or addressing inherent design flaws. This seemed unlikely that it never happened and more likely that I just never came across the relevant information. I could not be sure. So I asked.
Things were looking promising on this thread, even though no one has come along and actually pointed out any possible design changes like I have mentioned. People were kindly discussing the changes by Sig or Sigarms of which they knew, even if they were not exactly what I meant. Instead of suspicious paranoid innuendos rudely insulting their intentions and or comprehension skills like you did to me, I gently tried to be more specific than I originally realized necessary. If you are insulted that I might imply that I have read from credible sources here or elsewhere that Sig quality has slipped, I ask what your motivations are? Is it to discourage thoughtful inquiries and answers about multi-million dollar corporations and or companies because it may not be flattering to their corporate and or product image? Understand, this is not, nor is it ever my motivation. But if it happens that a company's actions or lack thereof reflect badly upon them, then so be it. I couldn't care less. But I will not cower in the face of a poster with the title of "moderator" or "administrator" when it comes to honest and open discussion about a product for which I have or may spend my very hard-earned dollars. If you find my posts "rude", not "forthright" and even "deceitful", then so be it. I was not attacking Sig, but if I was, and or you think I am, I ask why it should matter either way?
This is a forum. People openly discuss relevant subject matter here. At least they have since before and after I joined here in 2004. Let me know if I am wrong and I will remove my membership.
Things were looking promising on this thread, even though no one has come along and actually pointed out any possible design changes like I have mentioned. People were kindly discussing the changes by Sig or Sigarms of which they knew, even if they were not exactly what I meant. Instead of suspicious paranoid innuendos rudely insulting their intentions and or comprehension skills like you did to me, I gently tried to be more specific than I originally realized necessary. If you are insulted that I might imply that I have read from credible sources here or elsewhere that Sig quality has slipped, I ask what your motivations are? Is it to discourage thoughtful inquiries and answers about multi-million dollar corporations and or companies because it may not be flattering to their corporate and or product image? Understand, this is not, nor is it ever my motivation. But if it happens that a company's actions or lack thereof reflect badly upon them, then so be it. I couldn't care less. But I will not cower in the face of a poster with the title of "moderator" or "administrator" when it comes to honest and open discussion about a product for which I have or may spend my very hard-earned dollars. If you find my posts "rude", not "forthright" and even "deceitful", then so be it. I was not attacking Sig, but if I was, and or you think I am, I ask why it should matter either way?
This is a forum. People openly discuss relevant subject matter here. At least they have since before and after I joined here in 2004. Let me know if I am wrong and I will remove my membership.