Announcement The Atmosphere of Northwest Firearms - Changes

[Jabba]

Maybe completely hide the political section from those with under 10 posts or 6 months membership? I'm always dumbfounded at the effort people will put into yelling at something they don't like instead of not click/change the channel, but there are a ton out there.

 

[Velzey]

This website is kinda like my tv, I have the ultimate control. I don't need an ignore button, a dislike button etc. This isn't Facebook and it's not arfcom...if I don't like something I simply move on.

I learned a long time ago you cannot argue over the inter web...

 

[shootnscoot]

To be frank, I think some of the wounds here are self inflicted. A recent example is the obvious non-firearm political Burns county thread that was allowed to fester on to thousands of posts, then suddenly deemed "off topic" and then finally after hundreds of more posts, deemed to be non-firearm political and violating the rules. It's hard to fault the rule breakers when they see violations selectively enforced. It encourages it.

I've found the majority of posters here to be great, but there are a select few that are so far down the ideological rabbit hole that they should probably just be banned for the sake of the site and your business. There is no 1st amendment issue, its your business, kick the trouble makers/trolls out.

 

[DuneHopper]

To be frank, I think some of the wounds here are self inflicted. A recent example is the obvious non-firearm political Burns county thread that was allowed to fester on to thousands of posts, then suddenly deemed "off topic" and then finally after hundreds of more posts, deemed to be non-firearm political and violating the rules. It's hard to fault the rule breakers when they see violations selectively enforced. It encourages it.
I've found the majority of posters here to be great, but there are a select few that are so far down the ideological rabbit hole that they should probably just be banned for the sake of the site and your business. There is no 1st amendment issue, its your business, kick the trouble makers/trolls out.

I agree with your point of Fester as I have mentioned a few times the political aspect is where this comes from. The fact the site operators " allowed to fester" I think is a stretch in my opinion because it was either by choice or accident did show however Joes point on how the site does not do well when issues like politics are discussed.

 

[Bill in fl]

If you want to force people to play nice then require people to use their real names.

This (along with the following paragraph). Too many people online are rude and insulting and hide behind a "nom de plume".

The simplest most non complicated solution is usually the best one (Occam's razor).
That's why I think too many rules over thinks and over complicates things for members. The old "K.I.S.S." (keep it simple stupid) maxim is a good one. Rather than dislike buttons, arbitrary moderator decisions that allow THIS slightly political remark but doesn't allow THAT political remark, leads to resentment of moderators and accusations of favoritism. There is a very simple way to avoid all that with just one rule change. No political discussions of any kind allowed.

If it isn't about the physics of, the mechanics of, the fixing of, sale of, comparison of, the shooting enjoyment of firearms and of firearm accessories, it can't be posted. Simple.

 

[IheartSig]

• How do we create a positive, welcoming environment here?

We make the non 2A legal/political sections opt in only and hide them from public view, similar to the Tavern. We encourage new members, show them politeness and encouragement when they post. Every time I make a deal outside this forum, I talk it up. I point people towards the forum, I explain it to them etc. I stopped for a short time because of the negativity and bullying going on, but have started again as I see a shift in the pattern.

• What do we want peoples' initial impressions of our community to be?

I would think we want to people to see us for what we TRULY are. 2A supporters and enthusiasts from all different walks of life, backgrounds and experience levels, gathering here to share our hobby/interests/lifestyle with one another. I would think that we would want people to feel safe here, to learn, discuss and make friends.

• What words do we want people to use to describe our community?

Friendly, Inviting, nonjudgmental, Experienced, Knowledgeable, professional, welcoming, informative, understanding, volunteer, environmentally respectful, funny....

• What words do we not want people to use to describe our community?

Right wing, Republican, Democrat, liberal, conservative, Harsh, grumpy, alienating, crazy, rude, controlling, mean, rude, hateful, pompous, self righteous....

 

[Certaindeaf]

One thing I personally would like to see and that might ultimately help all involved when "this" is all hashed out is..

Have the rules spelled out in a plain and businesslike manner.. perhaps similar/akin to the rules of firearms safety.
Presently, the rules encompass fourteen "page down" keystrokes (I couldn't figure out how to do a word count). This verbosity probably just confuses and yields misinterpretation.. and I found the "rules" difficult to physically find.. they presently are at the bottommost portion of the page and in fine print.
Maybe it/they could be like right under your nose where you can see them when you "land" on any given page and not have to actually search for them.

 

[Goosebrown]

Presently, the rules encompass fourteen "page down" keystrokes (I couldn't figure out how to do a word count).

You can always copy and paste into Word, that has a word count.

 

[Certaindeaf]

You can always copy and paste into Word, that has a word count.

I would imagine. Good enough is good enough.

 

[Member 34319]

My only addition to an idea for improvement is to !make the community outreach and educational aspect of this site more prevalent. I use a tablet or iPhone primarily to access this site as Tapatalk got the boot. However since the latest rendition makes using the site easier, it is much more difficult to see the main purpose for this organization of gun guys and gals. In my opinion it should be one of the first forum tabs up towards the top. Not third down towards the bottom.

Other than that, I'm o e of those guys that has been on forums for some time. I understand there will always be threads that I will simply ignore. That's my ignore button.

 

[Patriot1668]

Joe,

I appreciate this thread. It has helped define the issues, as well as your vision for the site. For myself, this is the greatest help in understanding the things I can do (or not do) to promote and preserve the site.

I agree with the suggestion of an area set aside for political discussion. Our opponents are political, we can't ignore them.

I think that the posting of articles has been of value to the community, and would be disappointed to see that brought to a stop.

I suggest that an easily identified forum for basic firearms information would be helpful for new or non-members. The idea is to make the site an easy resource for those that are new to firearms. It would address some of the misinformation that's out there, and diminish the intimidation people might feel.

"Everything you ever wanted to know about firearms, but were afraid to ask".

Questions like the difference between auto and semi-auto, or between a magazine and a clip, or a pistol and a revolver. Perhaps it could answer other questions such as "How do I choose my first.....?" or "Where can I learn to shoot?". Some discussion of firearms transfer law would seem to be helpful as well.

Thanks for the site, and the leadership role you're taking.

- Patriot

 

[Joe13]

This is relevant I believe... Please delete if not.

The Columbian New Paper, while not a forum had a VERY active comments section that bad both great posters and huge trolls.

They switched to needing to sign up with your real name and Facebook account.

The comments went from the 100's on an article like a shooting or pot or the new bridge on I-5 down to maybe 5 posts at the most.

Generally from older makes with nothing left to loose in life.



Now, having said that. Many, many people have my phone number and that's fine - BUT if I had to use my full name, I feel that puts my family at risk.

Am I an A-hole on the site? I don't think so, but I've found in my short lifetime that being overly honest or blunt leaves people with either really liking me or really hating me.

I don't want someone that's on my ignore list for example, to decide he/she needs to discuss a matter with me FTF at my front door. Especially, if I'm not home and my ladies are.




I will not make this statement about ANY other suggestion but this single one:

If forced to use real names, I would ask for my account to be deleted and wouldn't ever look back.

That is absolutely not a threat, I just see giving my address information which is tied to my real name a huge security risk.

There are always crazies in the bunch. With the huge number of members here plus all of the lurkers, even if that number is at 0.01% that would be 360 fruit cakes in the bunch.

 

[ISY]

Regarding real names, I'm uncomfortable with it because it's so easy to triangulate on anyone these days with just a bit of info about them. I'm okay with the mods having real names and verified contact info but the publicly accessible sections should allow anonymous handles if the user wants that.

 

[etrain16]

This is relevant I believe... Please delete if not.

The Columbian New Paper, while not a forum had a VERY active comments section that bad both great posters and huge trolls.

They switched to needing to sign up with your real name and Facebook account.

The comments went from the 100's on an article like a shooting or pot or the new bridge on I-5 down to maybe 5 posts at the most.

Generally from older makes with nothing left to loose in life.



Now, having said that. Many, many people have my phone number and that's fine - BUT if I had to use my full name, I feel that puts my family at risk.

Am I an A-hole on the site? I don't think so, but I've found in my short lifetime that being overly honest or blunt leaves people with either really liking me or really hating me.

I don't want someone that's on my ignore list for example, to decide he/she needs to discuss a matter with me FTF at my front door. Especially, if I'm not home and my ladies are.




I will not make this statement about ANY other suggestion but this single one:

If forced to use real names, I would ask for my account to be deleted and wouldn't ever look back.

That is absolutely not a threat, I just see giving my address information which is tied to my real name a huge security risk.

There are always crazies in the bunch. With the huge number of members here plus all of the lurkers, even if that number is at 0.01% that would be 360 fruit cakes in the bunch.

Did someone suggest going to real names? Uggh.

I wouldn't be okay with that idea either - not only for personal safety, but considering the political climate, I don't need anti's looking for those that actively post and then using the real names, along with the new, about to be passed law in Oregon, and turning us all in as "mental health cases". Nope, I'd end my account right then and there too. I realize we're not exactly 'invisible' here, but no need to make it easier to the enemies of gun ownership.

 

[Mikej]

@Joe13 @etrain16 ...Real name was just an idea that floated past, doesn't matter who floated it. I seriously doubt that would ever happen ,or be thought about for even a second.

After reading all this I think I can do fine with anything I've heard Joe plans on doing. I've never had "Points"! I don't believe I've had a mod warn or remind me about anything. So I must be okay, right?

All I'll say is that this place is like a large room. There are many people in this room. With a lot of people come different ages, backgrounds, attitudes, incomes, ethnicities, outlooks, opinions, intelligence, writing style, introverted, extroverted etc, etc, etc. Etrain16 is, [among others] one of our top posters, so well written and easy to read and understand. There are many people out there that are way at the other end of the spectrum. That are not so "Discussion Forum Savvy". It's tougher for those, and many others in between, to write what they want to convey as easily as Etrain16. I don't want to see those people moderated off the board because they are rough around the edges. Even folks that are combative, or insulting at times can have valuable input. Reprimanding someone who doesn't post much may cause them to leave. The people on this board, compared to ifish, for the most part ignore rude people and for the most part they go away or change their tone. So the membership has great moderation power in that respect. If ignoring doesn't help those types along, well, then they get the "MOD HAMMER"

The "Why so much hate thread" was THE perfect example of how we shoot ourselves in the foot. When that thread came up I thought "GREAT, we have a chance to educate one of the "On the fencers", for lack of a better term. It didn't take long for someone to come out and shout "TROLL". I wasn't even going to post on it after that for fear of being called out. What would it have hurt to take that individual seriously?

I've said before, ignore isn't a feature, speaking just for myself here, that I use. I have a scroll wheel for that. Besides, like I said above, even the turds have something worth reading at times.

Links? Post 'em up! Putting convoluted rules to posting links sounds terrible. Do you really want moderators to have to police links too? It would be nice if people included some of their own writing/opinion with a link but....Besides, I click on the thread/link and don't like what I see? That back button is just as easy to use as the scroll wheel.

I like this place, faults and all!

 

[Koda]

no names or Im deleting my account.

this is a gun forum where we discuss hot topic gun politics, self defense tactics, very expensive personal weapons that are highly sought out by criminals.... I think if thats not obviouse enough then I will delete my account im not putting my name out there.

 

[mike633]

Most of you have seen and read The Atmosphere of Northwest Firearms. My inbox currently holds 376 conversations pertaining to this; an incredible amount of feedback. I've read all of them, and starting today I'm going to do my best to reply to each of them. I appreciate all of you who took the time to write. While reading these conversations over the past few days I've been compiling my thoughts for the purpose of posting them here for public commentary. There has been no 'behind the scenes' discussion among the staff. Though I will be making the final decisions, this involves everyone. Hopefully we can come up with solutions to our issues together.

One of our biggest challenges is making people understand that unlike most internet forums, our goals (which I mention below) are much more important to us than traffic numbers, advertising, etc. Regardless of money I couldn't live with myself if I were running a community that I knew hurt our cause, and right now I believe that's exactly what I'm doing. Getting people to understand that this is a single issue community built for all current and potential gun owners regardless of political party is something I must do. Fact is there are pro-gun Democrats such as Sen. Betsy Johnson (D-OR) and anti-gun Republicans such as Michael Bloomberg (who has been more effective than anyone when it comes to infringing on the 2A). No question, the simplified generalizations so pervasive here and everywhere else are short-sighted, foolish, and irresponsible, doing great damage to our cause in the solidly blue Pacific Northwest.

Our previous attempts at trying to please everyone has resulted in failure (big surprise), so the new plan is to focus on catering to those who share our goals. I would rather have a smaller group working toward these goals than a larger group whose actions reflect that they don't particularly care. I fully expect to lose some people with the changes we're going to make. I fully expect people to whine about heavy handed moderation, though they violated clearly-written rules with which they didn't agree. I fully expect people to complain about NWFA infringing on their 1st amendment right, and I suggest they re-read the constitution. I fully expect people to complain about moderators unfairly targeting conservatives, though they cannot see who was warned or banned and why. I'm fully aware that, for better or worse, I'll have to live with the results of the decisions we make in the coming week. I'm perfectly fine with that, now more than ever.

REITERATION OF OUR GOALS

1. Promote a positive image of gun owners and gun ownership.
   
2. Increase the overall number of gun owners in the Pacific Northwest.
   
3. Educate gun owners to increase knowledge and safety. Educate non-gun owners to increase knowledge and dispel common myths.
4. Provide resources useful to Northwest gun owners, both online and offline.
5. Provide a medium for members to organize pro-2A activist efforts on the grassroots level.

While we do work with 2A political organizations on occasion, our purpose has never included direct political involvement ourselves. Two reasons for this:

1. There are numerous organizations one can join and work within which are focused solely on the political side of the 2A. The line between activism and politics is very thin, with the difference being that activism represents action.
   
2. No way around it, the practice of politics breeds division. Go read the latest email from any of our 2A organizations and see for yourself. I'm not saying it's right or it's wrong. However, considering our aim of bringing people together and growing our numbers, these are mutually exclusive.

Us trying to serve as yet another 2A political organization does nothing to help our cause, it further divides our resources and organization. Everyone trying to do everything is extremely inefficient and counterproductive. Our strategy, a better strategy, is to focus on specialized goals. One of (if not the) the most important is working to attract new gun owners. Once they've overcome the initial, inherent intimidation of gun ownership and hooked on shooting then they can decide whether they want to get politically involved. Our choice to focus on one aspect, the very first steps in gun ownership, absolutely requires that we maintain a solid, positive image and a welcoming, friendly environment.

I'm not sure who came up with the flawed theory that gun ownership and gun politics cannot be separated - they absolutely can. The use and enjoyment of a right does not automatically involve one in the political fight to protect that right. Right or wrong, participation in that fight is an individual choice. When a group of people all fighting for the same cause attempt to identify which of them are 'more' for their cause it is known as eating their own (#3 below). Unfortunately human nature guarantees that this entirely voluntary habit remains prevalent across the the entire political spectrum.

ISSUES WE NEED TO ADDRESS

1. COMMUNITY TONE/FEEL/FIRST IMPRESSION - I'll go back to the analogy I used in the other thread. If military recruitment began with a war zone tour, how many people would join? How many people aren't joining NWFA in the first place because of what they see? One of the reasons this site has been very successful in the past is due to us being local and welcoming to new people, and us doing our best to provide a helpful, unbiased firearm community. Many have made what will likely be lifelong friends here, despite eventually finding out they had political differences. If those differences were highlighted rather than their shared interest in guns, those friendships likely wouldn't exist. We need to make every effort to focus on the one topic that unites all of us: firearms.
   
   
2. OUR IMAGE - Gun forums in general are a great argument against gun owners and the 2A. Empirical data shows that gun owners are generally law abiding, responsible, quality people. Unfortunately those positive character traits seem to disappear for many once they're in front of a screen. Others are simply so far out of touch that their constant preaching makes us all look like Jerry Fletcher. Even with irrefutable evidence, nobody would believe them because of their reputation. Image is every bit as important as the message one is trying to convey.
   
   
3. CANNIBALISTIC BEHAVIOR - Snubbing and ostracizing others because they're not 'pro-gun enough' is a great way to kill our cause. It's so effective that opposition groups actually use it against us, and we fall for it every time. Who wants to keep company with people who behave like that? In the same way you have to crawl before you can run, it is extremely unlikely for someone to become 100% as-it-was-written pro-gun without being educated in a positive, respectful manner in a non-hostile environment. You will never convince anyone by talking down to them or telling them they're wrong.

CHANGES BEING MADE

1. Rule Updates - Particularly #1
2. Disabled Deleted Post/Thread Placeholder - These serve no good purpose other than to anger people knowing that something was removed. A failed experiment, this is why most other forums don't have them enabled. We will be looking into how we can update our warning system to send a copy of content for which a user was warned.
3. The report button will be moved out of the post control menu to a more convenient location (to be determined).
4. Enforcement of non-2A/RKBA content rule in the Preparedness & Survival section.

POSSIBLE/LIKELY CHANGES

1. Crowd Moderation - We're currently testing a system which will automatically hide a post once it has been reported by members a set number of times. The existing system will still function as normal so moderators can review reports and take further action (or restore the post). The goal with this is to get members more involved in the policing of the site.
2. Legal & Political will be split into two new categories; Laws & Legal for the discussion of current laws and legal issues and Legislation & Activism for the discussion of 2A legislation and activism efforts.
3. Non-firearm political content will be changed to non-2A/RKBA content.
4. Prohibition of news links and chain emails. These carry with them inherent bias and emotion, causing the same in most discussions that takes place.
5. Renaming warnings to reminders. We shouldn't be considering this as we're all adults here, but people act like they're being penalized when they receive a warning. A warning is simply a reminder. The penalty for too many warnings is a vacation, which is actually very rare.

QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER

• How do we create a positive, welcoming environment here?
  
• What do we want peoples' initial impressions of our community to be?
  
• What words do we want people to use to describe our community?
• What words do we not want people to use to describe our community?

BEFORE REPLYING HERE

This thread is for feedback on the possible changes or questions. We are not looking for arguments, opinion, or discussion regarding our strategy. Though these are technically opinions, Northwest Firearms will be operating as though they are facts. You don't have to leave if you don't agree, but you do have to respect our rules.

What we are looking for is ideas on how we can solve these issues as a community. Please take the above into consideration. Thank you for your time.

Joe Link
Northwest Firearms

Regarding image, stolen guns are not often differentiated from legally purchased guns when it comes to news or political BSing. We, as responsible gun owners can help our cause by making sure our guns are not susceptible to theft (or children). Developing new habits and using well anchored gun safes would go a long way in reducing or eliminating "loose" guns and gun thefts.

 

[Slobray]

Legal & Political will be split into two new categories; Laws & Legal for the discussion of current laws and legal issues and Legislation & Activism for the discussion of 2A legislation and activism efforts.

I think that might be a little confusing "Laws & Legal" and "Legislation & Activism" because once legislation is passed it becomes a law, so a switch in forums? How about just make an all-encompassing Legal forum?

Maybe the legal/legislative forum could be broken down into 3 categories: National, Oregon and Washington or maybe 2 categories (national and PNW) because of the dedication to gun rights by some of our members, like @Caveman Jim, who drove for hours from Washington, crossing state lines to support gun owners in Oregon.

I really like the idea of an activism forum, because what good is knowing about proposed legislation if you're not willing to do anything about it. I would suggest that the legal forum and activism forum be linked to each other somehow.

Many here are advocating the deletion or hiding of anything political, in my mind that would mean the legal forum. I'm asking you to not delete or hide the legal forum as it is the most important section for all gun owners, whether they want to believe it or not. To understand why I say this, all you have to do is look at how many gun owners in the PNW didn't (or still don't) know about I594 or SB 941. How many of the 30,000 members on this site didn't/don't know about those and upcoming laws, because they don't want to be political?

Being a "gun nut" and knowing every minute detail about every gun ever produced is all well and good, but what good is that information if you can't put it to use, like Australia, the UK or other "civilized nations"?


Ray

P.S. For what it's worth, I think that every member should have to spend time in the legal/legislative forum before they can visit the other forums, that way they will know what attacks are coming.

 

[PiratePast40]

Like it or not, legislation and politics play a big part in our efforts to preserve our 2A rights. Because of that, I don't believe that eliminating political content serves our purposes. Are there some that go overboard? Of course there are and it's up to the mods to keep an eye on that. Many members here are willing to report someone for particularly noxious comments or attacks on others and the mods have been doing a good job as well.

As far as the recent eastern Oregon thread, I think the mods did a great job of letting people go, and then putting it in the corner when the time came. If you'll notice, it was the same people that were doing the screaming and yelling in other threads that were the bad actors here.

With local elections on the horizon, it's critical that we know of and discuss the issues and viewpoints of the candidates. Will there be overlaps into other political issues? Yes, and that goes with the territory. When irrelevant, it needs to be controlled. But it's going to happen. We're not perfect here but by and large, most keep a level head and observe the rules.

 

[Mikej]

Like it or not, legislation and politics play a big part in our efforts to preserve our 2A rights. Because of that, I don't believe that eliminating political content serves our purposes. Are there some that go overboard? Of course there are and it's up to the mods to keep an eye on that. Many members here are willing to report someone for particularly noxious comments or attacks on others and the mods have been doing a good job as well.

As far as the recent eastern Oregon thread, I think the mods did a great job of letting people go, and then putting it in the corner when the time came. If you'll notice, it was the same people that were doing the screaming and yelling in other threads that were the bad actors here.

With local elections on the horizon, it's critical that we know of and discuss the issues and viewpoints of the candidates. Will there be overlaps into other political issues? Yes, and that goes with the territory. When irrelevant, it needs to be controlled. But it's going to happen. We're not perfect here but by and large, most keep a level head and observe the rules.

Many here are advocating the deletion or hiding of anything political, in my mind that would mean the legal forum. I'm asking you to not delete or hide the legal forum as it is the most important section for all gun owners, whether they want to believe it or not. To understand why I say this, all you have to do is look at how many gun owners in the PNW didn't (or still don't) know about I594 or SB 941. How many of the 30,000 members on this site didn't/don't know about those and upcoming laws, because they don't want to be political?

I agree with these gentlemen. Everyone isn't a perfect poster in the beginning, it takes some time/nurturing. As I said, the active membership is pretty good at ignoring nastiness, and IF that doesn't do it it's time for moderation. I'd hate to see the admin pushing members to rat out every little thing that MIGHT be questionable.