Announcement The Atmosphere of Northwest Firearms - Changes

[etrain16]

@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!

Jeez Mike, you're going to make me blush Thanks for the kind words though. This forum has quite a good list of well-spoken folks that regularly contribute and make this place a great place to visit - I'm thankful for them all.

One huge problem in any online forum is the fact that emotions do not convey well in written form. How many times have all of us been mistakenly accused of being angry or attacking someone when we just wrote our thoughts out without intending it to come across that way? I've certainly done it, and, upon reading my post again, found that what I said could be taken the wrong way. I try to avoid writing a post when I'm angry about something, but don't always manage to succeed at that. What I can't take into account in anything I post is how the other person will perceive what I wrote - their emotional response is something I can't always anticipate.

I'm quite fortunate in that my job includes a LOT of writing - bid letters, contract documents, code clarifications, etc., so I get a lot of practice. And those letters often get incorporated directly into contracts. In that sense, I've learned over a lot of years of mistakes, how to be careful in what I say, and precise as possible, at least most of the time. It's probably why I tend to be a little wordy in my responses. Everyone has a different style. For some, it's obvious what their emotions are in their writing, for others, you may have to get to know them before you realize they're not angry, it's just the way they communicate. That's why I hate to see over-moderation of a site. Not every misunderstanding is due to someone being a Richard, sometimes it's just a simple miscommunication that may have seemed completely benign to them. Trouble makers, in my opinion, are limited to a very few folks here.

This is a good site, and hopefully, with these changes, will be even better.

@Joe Link, I've got an idea that popped into my head recently and wanted to run it by you, and since this thread seems like the right place - here it is. I was thinking about creating a position at the forum known as "Ambassadors". The idea would be that there would be a pool of folks, preferably established members, that would or could be 'assigned' to new members and visitors. The purpose of the ambassadors would be to help the new folks learn to navigate, answer some questions and just be certain that the new folks get a warm welcome. It could be an optional thing, that a new member could select to have assigned to them. Most of the jobs I've worked, you have someone assigned as kind of a welcome team, to help guide you in your initial arrival to a new place. It's kind of along those lines. We have some pretty friendly folks here that I'm sure wouldn't mind offering to fulfill such a position. I know the mods and you are busy with other things, so it wouldn't put any additional burden on any of you. Ultimately, it assures that they make at least one personal connection when they come to the site, and that may just help more folks comfortably enter the NWFA space.

 

[Jim Colvill]

The idea of requiring real names which force posters to own their statements sounded good to me. I must say though , thanks to etrain16 and others,I recognize the sense in going by a nom de plume. That being said, the example of the "Thread which shall not be named" spotlights the need for change and more aggressive moderation. NWFA should be about guns with discussions of upcoming gun legislation being the only political topic allowed; there are ample echo chambers on the web where one may discuss whether Leonard Nimoy called for a hit on Antonin Scalia or the merits of paramilitary groups. I frequent several other boards, not all gun related ,where the Mods strictly enforce the "No Politics/religion" policy and battles very rarely pop up. This pleases me since I know full well I'm on the opposite end of the political scale than most of the members but we can meet in the common appreciation of our hobby.

my 2 cents,
Jim

 

[Mikej]

How could we have gentle reminders posted that are easy to see suggesting not using terms like "Liberal Anti Gun" but "Anti gun" or "Anti 2nd Amendment"?

 

[etrain16]

How could we have gentle reminders posted that are easy to see suggesting not using terms like "Liberal Anti Gun" but "Anti gun" or "Anti 2nd Amendment"?

Probably the easiest solution to that issue is to have Joe add those words to the bubblegum filter - either turn the terms into "bubblegum" or a bunch of "*******", just like he did with the Tavern That way if folks didn't get the message, or choose to ignore it, then auto-moderation kicks in.

 

[DuneHopper]

Hi there,
Slept on a few responses.

1. Nothing against the post above me ^^^ Koda as I respect allot of what you post, but can we stop warning NWFA that if they wont do as we want we are leaving. I find this not fair to a discussion and every so often read it. Just my opinion but trying to make a point is taken away when we use "or else".

2. The political section in my opinion actually does not belong on a gun site. I know many disagree with me, but gees la weez I can count on both hands how many Oregon groups post this crap all day long and it ends up taking 90% of this site. Is it important yes I agree but is it relevant to the plan Joe is wanting to have no.

3. I know many of the group love the lobby OFF well doesn't that site and Dave Workman just about cover everything we need? If so then why not make a NRA/OFF section, give Dave Woman a thread area and OFF/ NRA and be done with it? And that way responsible persons are leading the postings here in political.

My concern and question is if we leave the political open to general politics even if slightly vague well every tom dick and harry will start guiding it and then we will be back to the moderators having to watch the political section all the time. Doing a section for OFF and the NRA as well as Dave W, would keep top needed material but limit it to typical non-related BS. And please guys like the new rule #1 let be excellent to each other and not threaten NWFA either in PM or in threads of leaving its a very unfair tactic in my opinion

Ok I think I have given enough opinions in this thread covered what I thought I could.

 

[Jim Colvill]

How could we have gentle reminders posted that are easy to see suggesting not using terms like "Liberal Anti Gun" but "Anti gun" or "Anti 2nd Amendment"?

Yes, realize that not all liberals are anti-gun and not all conservatives are pro-gun. The "Liberals need to die" sentiment needs to be scrapped. Such broad brush tactics are a benefit to no one.

 

[Mikej]

@etrain16 Well! Looks like we have our first candidate up for "Ambassador"! Mighty nice of you to volunteer for the position.

No, seriously though. Neat idea.

 

[Mikej]

Yes, realize that not all liberals are anti-gun and not all conservatives are pro-gun. The "Liberals need to die" sentiment needs to be scrapped. Such broad brush tactics are a benefit to no one.

I wasn't posting to you @Qaolin, just with so much going on in this thread it may have looked like that.

 

[Jim Colvill]

I wasn't posting to you @Qaolin, just with so much going on in this thread it may have looked like that.

Heh heh, I wasn't offended, I was trying to agree with you and expand a bit.

 

[Mikej]

Probably the easiest solution to that issue is to have Joe add those words to the bubblegum filter - either turn the terms into "bubblegum" or a bunch of "*******", just like he did with the ****** That way if folks didn't get the message, or choose to ignore it, then auto-moderation kicks in.

No, too many uses for liberal that doesn't have anything to do with politics. I really hate seeing bubblegum in place of things other than the seven, eight or so words you don't use on TV/radio.

"The honey badger gave the lion a liberal dose of woop-arse!" "That's how he dooo"

 

[Koda]

Koda as I respect allot of what you post, but can we stop warning NWFA that if they wont do as we want we are leaving. I find this not fair to a discussion and every so often read it. Just my opinion but trying to make a point is taken away when we use "or else".

fair enough, but to clarify my post wasnt a warning nor "or else" in an attempt to get my way. Im ok with whatever changes NWFA makes im just saying thats something that would cause me to consider participating here. The antis have long sought after publishing names of CHL holders etc. putting your name out on a public gun forum is the same thing. So yes, just being honest that would cause me to consider deleting my account.

BTW, I respect a lot of what you post too.

 

[Joe Link]

Don't worry guys, we won't be requiring the use of real names.

More replies when I get back to my computer. I appreciate everyone's feedback!

 

[DuneHopper]

fair enough, but to clarify my post wasnt a warning nor "or else" in an attempt to get my way. Im ok with whatever changes NWFA makes im just saying thats something that would cause me to consider participating here. The antis have long sought after publishing names of CHL holders etc. putting your name out on a public gun forum is the same thing. So yes, just being honest that would cause me to consider deleting my account.

BTW, I respect a lot of what you post too.

BTW I agree with posting the names out there as a bad idea 100%, I only was addressing the
wording I saw not just yourself but even Joe Link has said people have PM'd saying they would leave. Nothing personal I just didnt see it as productive. But its all good here.

 

[DuneHopper]

Thanks Joe Link for having such and open discussion this topic.
Regardless of the outcome all must commend you on that as a key strategy to getting
input and showing others you give a crap about what they say !

 

[Contract_Pilot]

What I see that runs people off!

#1 is Thread Crapping!

#2 Mods running off helpers which are a Great Asset to the form because of the incidental/advert sales where it be a part time hobby or full blown retail.

Not every dealer/self funding hobbyist is making a massive profit. Most are kitchen counter or home garage hobbyists covers expenses.

We garage hobbyists cannot afford the massive monthly charges on a NWFA supporting membership so we just stop helping to avoid a hassle. When we get moderated about not being a supporting member etc. Why spend time to help to refer to another vendor "some times we do" or get told not to advertise when we can help and offer a discount to Members?

We are treated as If our expertise/knowledge is not wanted? Knowledge is always free to a point! But some times a item must be referred why help and refer to someone else? If one can help make a few bucks + forum gets content = more members!

Our time and knowledge, yes even hobbyists/collectors in a specific area is just as valuable as yours is, and if we got what they are Asking For, Require, or Need local = good for Both!

Again The Forum gets the knowledge & content + generally more content afterwords. Possibly the dealer or hobbyist makes a few bucks.

I can see where a large dealer like keiths or others may have to be supporting members.

As the last message I received I have withdrawn from any ak build help.

Just my thoughts!

Why help when we get classified as a dealer and the forum wants large sums of cash monthly.

 

[RicInOR]

I need further explanation of this point:

Enforcement of non-2A/RKBA content rule in the Preparedness & Survival section.

Will that mean Preparedness will have to be about guns, or can't be about guns, or something else?

 

[russthetoolman]

I am a member of a non gun forum that has the "ignore user" feature, I like it because I have control over what I choose to read from whom in a thread.
The same forum has an "underground" section that requires a second registration to, after registering to the main one, to allow the more heated, off topic discussions.
It also keeps the main site clean to the public and allows the same great people to talk like they would hanging out.
Maybe name it "The Hangout".
The users and mod would comment in the thread if it went outside the rules to " Move it to the underground"
It would provide an outlet without shutting down the opinions and keep the main site "clean".
So the two points were:
1. Ignore User feature.
2. Second registration to a second affiliated forum, Hangout.
Thanks
Russ

 

[OutlawHoss]

So I'll contribute a bit to the discussion (which I think in itself is a great demonstration of what the site is capable of, so kudos to all). As someone who joined 8/12 but posted some 90% of my posts in the last 6-8 weeks (which is just typical of my nature as well as current events and a revolving focus in my collection of hobbies) I really like the idea of an Ambassador role to reach out to people in a encouraging, show-you-the-ropes kind of orientation, or even like a mentor. After all, there are those who have wisdom that should be shared, and introducing people to the life-affirming benefits of dignity, responsibility, and respect for others is part and parcel of passing on the traditions involved with firearms in America. This site should absolutely put this goal (as I am agreeing with and echoing what I'm reading from Joe Link) ahead of the practices that would take away from it. There are plenty of other places to demonstrate our popular practice of putting others down. This not only tears apart forums, it tears apart the country, and I've just had enough of it, period.
I'll share something that I would not of shared when I first registered on this site years ago: I'm a Native American man, who has spent a large part of my life in environmental activism as well issues of native sovereignty and freedom at large. That's obviously not everything I am, but it is something about me I wouldn't of shared just months ago here. And here is why I think it's important that people like myself, and people not like myself, can come to a website that strives to have a bit more integrity than the next: there are lessons I have learned the hard way, and have paid dearly for, that others could benefit from; as well, if I am upright and breathing, I don't want to invest in a community that won't challenge me, but could present a hard learned lesson that someone else, from another walk of life has learned that I simply wouldn't have the opportunity or time to learn myself. In that way, we make each other stronger, and better equipped for the struggle we have in common, that we are all here to face. Consider this lesson from a person whose ancestors couldn't come together to fight a common enemy 500 years ago, yet had every skill, strength, courage, and ability to do so only if we had put our differences aside. Today, most natives I know are very patriotic and passionate Americans, and like folks here want to rise above the fray and not be victims of our own shortcomings.
So I will relinquish my soapbox and conclude that I support the forum's founders in the endeavor to transcend the recent issues and challenges and forge a better forum, if for no other reason than because we can.
. . . and I don't know what smiley is appropriate to put here so

 

[Schleeb]

I understand and agree completely... there are plenty of other websites to do the political thing on. Use them is you feel the need.

 

[Hal Jordan]

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.

I concur with these statements. I returned to Oregon after many years away and started looking for a discussion forum where I could get an answer to a Second Amendment political question. NWFA was the best place I could find, and I did get some good answers. It's too bad that we can't enjoy all of our Second Amendment rights from sea to shining sea, but the uncomfortable truth is that there are people who would love to take our guns away from us. If they do, then there will be no need for a firearms discussion forum at all. To protect our rights, we need to discuss and be aware of pending legislation, national trends, organizations dedicated to confiscation, candidates who support our freedoms, and many other political topics. Unfortunately, firearms and politics do go hand in hand in the US. If we don't discuss it, then who will? "Let someone else do it" seems to be an inadequate answer. Any politics related to firearms should be fair game for discussion. Hillary's email server and Trump's hairdo would be off topic.

I think the same idea goes for news links. We should be able to keep each other aware and up to date about Second Amendment happenings. Firearms-related news is another feature that keeps me coming back.

EDIT - Most other forums I know would simply add a post saying "New Rules" and force the users into compliance. I appreciate the ability to discuss the new rules before they go into effect. "What do you think?" are four very important words in any relationship. So thank you, Joe.

Feedback from a forum newbie.