Some thoughts on M4C.net

[Jay Cunningham]

And law enforcement

And unions.

[Suwannee Tim]

A couple of rules I apply to myself with more or less success is to eschew personal attacks and personal observations. The great majority of participants on this forum do as well which is appreciated. I think a resort to a personal attack is a good indication that someone is loosing an argument or has lost but is unwilling to admit defeat. Funny, I get attacked pretty regularly on the internet but almost never in person. It seems the protection of the distance and anonymity of the internet makes some folks a lot braver. I won't say anything on the internet that I will not say mano a mano. I think the fact that is very safe to be an asshole on the internet puts any forum on a very slippery slope towards chaos which has to be actively resisted if you want to prevent a slide. I find in very telling when someone makes a personal insult against someone they barely know.

I disagree that the GD is necessarily a bad feature. I think discussions deteriorate when personal shit is tossed in and I think the members should do more self-regulation by applying peer pressure against personal attacks to keep the quality of the discussions up and the work load of the mods down.

A surefire way to set men who'd normally be best shooting buds against one another and turn them into bitter adversaries is to discuss politics and religion.

I am buddies with U.S. Congresswoman Corrine Brown, she is a member of the gym I attend. I have shared the hot tub, steam room and sauna with her, walked her to her car at night, gotten her car and brought it to the door during a storm. We have talked about a lot of things, politics not one of them. I am sure I would never convince her of my views nor she convince me of her views. Unless you want to get pissed, and I don't, what is the point of such a discussion? Same holds true of religion. I avoided the "State of Christianity" thread for just that reason.

[HeavyDuty]

This would be a better, more focused forum without General Discussion. I know for a fact that the mods would have a lot less bullshit to put up with.

As I've stated before, I would be fully behind this.

[MistWolf]

A surefire way to set men who'd normally be best shooting buds against one another and turn them into bitter adversaries is to discuss politics and religion.

...and the Great Pumpkin

[The_War_Wagon]

It seems that there is a lot going on with the site lately. New members who don't read the mission statement...

We are not TOS, The High Road, The Firing Line, Glocktalk, or any number of other general boards. This is a board for anyone with the mindset that good enough, isn't. Not just with firearms but with many points in our life. I know that if I ask a question here I will get a no BS answer that will point me in the right direction.

To cut to the heart of the matter, I think these two go hand in hand. Since many of us belong to other boards as well, and tend to point people here sometimes FOR those aforementioned NO BS answers, folks come FROM those other boards, where it IS a free-for-all, fling-much-poo, BS-types of places.

As things like, THE CHART (primarily), make the rounds, it's naturally going to draw more folks here - good & bad - and weeding will HAVE to take place. GD is already limited by having only members in good-standing with X number of posts, BEFORE they can post here. I think it's a Catch-22, but also a sign of growing pains.

Yeah, it makes more work for the mods, but we also want to continue to grow, and either attract the right kind of people, or at least, train those who DO come here, to be more genteel in their presentation.

[Littlelebowski]

And unions.

I don't judge you because of your civil union

[6933]

^Funny!

[SHIVAN]

This thread has good intentions, but it will turn sour before the end of page two. Marking it down now, so no one will be shocked later.

[Suwannee Tim]

And what, SHIVAN, do you predict will be the sourization mode?

[SteyrAUG]

A surefire way to set men who'd normally be best shooting buds against one another and turn them into bitter adversaries is to discuss politics and religion.

Depends on the man.

On TOS me and Old Painless had endless discussions on the subject, and I'm not sure I ever thought a bad thought about him. And I'm not sure he ever said a bad thing about me.

We of course had completely different opinions on the matter of religion, the difference seems to be he could support his opinions without simply telling me I'm wrong, can't understand Gods mysterious ways and will burn in hell and I could support my positions without telling him he was a delusional moron who worshiped fairy tales. There are a few people on this forum who can have the same discussions in the same fashion, the problem is those who can't.

Politics on the other hand is a bit trickier, because it isn't so much "differing opinions" as it is "things that are protected by the Constitution and things that are not." And if you are talking about threatening my "protected freedoms" I don't care what political party you come from, you are essentially the enemy.