S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,522
Posts545,770
Members14,419
|
Most Online1,344 Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 342
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 342 |
What chaps my hide about this forum is someone posts an honest reasonable question and too frequently in my view, subsequent posters turn the subject to displays of childish ego, rude behavior and insults. I can assure you that no man has ever looked me in the eye and insulted me the way some of you insult each other. In my opinion there are many people on this forum who have gifts to share and those gifts would be much more enjoyable if you wrote your responses as if you were face to face with the members of this forum. It is my understanding that new topics should contain a question and mind is directed to those who find it necesary to insult each other. Do you insult your friends, strangers and associates as you do the members of this forum?
Jim
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,990 Likes: 302
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,990 Likes: 302 |
FWIW, One thing I have found is that there are vast differences in what is considered tolerable/acceptable public exchange culturally and geographically.
An example can be found in forensics debate tactics applied in the east vs the midwest. Whole nother game.
Moderating tends to homogenize the discourse.
The best strategy I have found is to just ignore posts based on the name on the left of it. It lowers the nausea considerably.
Out there doing it best I can.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,704 Likes: 103
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,704 Likes: 103 |
The ignore function on this forum is it's greatest attribute...Geo
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350 |
I don't know if it's as much regional behaviour as reflection of a country in nervous breakdown. Cool members keep their heads. A few anonymous others in temper tantrums call for attention to themselves in their political sandboxes
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,164 Likes: 2
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,164 Likes: 2 |
The ignore function on this forum is it's greatest attribute...Geo You nailed it Geo. I've noticed many threads have become shorter and much more enjoyable since I've employed that function.
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits. - Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,025 Likes: 51
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,025 Likes: 51 |
I have never used the ignore function, though I have been tempted. I see it as rude in cutting people off, but it might be better than extreme irritation.
The baseline of this thread is correct, many here err both in manners and discussion.
I argue for the simple approach, stick to the point in discussion, attack ideas if necessary on their merits and avoid personal attacks.
I try to live by that and have at times failed to see that something I typed could be read in a way other than I meant. I am always prepared to back step and apologize should I do wrong. And or clarify better what was meant.
Manners, Etiquette, are important to a civil society as is honesty in thought and word. It is erroneous to assume a disagreement of fact is a question of character. If one sees misinformation (falsehood) identify and restate what is believed to be fact.
We are all bound by a love a doubleguns. That bond and simple manners are to everyone's advantage
Last edited by old colonel; 05/17/16 11:07 AM.
Michael Dittamo Topeka, KS
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,464 Likes: 212
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,464 Likes: 212 |
....I can assure you that no man has ever looked me in the eye and insulted me the way some of you insult each other. In my opinion there are many people on this forum who have gifts to share and those gifts would be much more enjoyable if you wrote your responses as if you were face to face with the members of this forum.... Not all gifts are equal. Exchanging superficial pleasantries face to face really doesn't translate to some higher level. I think the accounts here of forum folks meeting up beyond the computer have a good bit to do with compatibility clues, and less to do with being a double gun encyclopedia.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,742 Likes: 97
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,742 Likes: 97 |
keep it simple and keep it safe...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,345 Likes: 391
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,345 Likes: 391 |
What chaps my hide is when I put a few direct anti-gun quotes which someone made into a post, and the same few supporters of the Liberal Left Democrats who work tirelessly to separate us from our guns rise up in mock indignation. Then they get their panties all bunched up and bother Dave with demands that he remove them or lock a thread. But they don't do the same thing when one of their like-minded peers puts up a thread like this one which has absolutely nothing to do with advancing the knowledge and appreciation of double guns. Let me demonstrate: It's hardly mean-spirited to note that I'm an Obama supporter. I'm proud of it, apparent here as long as he's been around. He's anti-gun but has kept his legislative gun in his holster to position his party for '16. The Court departed from the original understanding of the Second. The NRA and other groups rejected the original interpretation. Even as late as 1991, the jurist Burger appointed by Nixon said "the Second Amendment has been the subject of one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word 'fraud,' on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime." In 2008, in the District of Columbia v. Heller, what Burger said was fraud was accepted by the court. Interesting stuff. Ed, historically the individual "right" to bear arms is relatively new. I believe John Ashcroft in 2002 became the first federal attorney-general to proclaim that individuals should be able to own guns. The Supreme Court in 2008 overturned all mainstream legal and historical scholarship by ruling that there is an individual right to own firearms although with some limits. Obama said it again last week.
I believe that during the previous 218 years the Second meant what it said: firearms shall be held by "the People"---a collective and not individual right---insofar they are in the service of "a well-regulated militia." Was an individual right even mentioned at the Constitutional Convention or in the House when it ratified the Amendment or when debated in state legislatures? I don't think so. Dave, Dave, Dave: you're like those fundamentalists who claim Jesus walked with the dinosaurs. There was no NRA at time of the Founding Fathers. The change was recent to what the Second is today. You acknowledge as "infringements" all those jurisdictions making the Second what they want it to be. But still the law.
Whether Americans carry because they can or have to is not the issue. They democratically make decisions on how they want to live. Their homicide record is not edifying among modern societies. It is a violent country. Democracies make choices. Americans accept mass murder to defend an individual right to bear arms in the name of personal freedom. I am typically pretty direct and straightforward. What passes for civility here is quite often hypocrisy laced with thinly veiled insults hurled by someone who thinks that they are above the fray by not naming names... as King has done here in his post. Dishonesty is not civility. Some are astute enough to see right through it: I think many here don't recognize King's penchant for Passive-Aggressive communication, and mistake it for some degree of decorum. He he is able to convey unreasonable concepts in a usually reasonable manner. That's the essence of attempted sociopathic indoctrination and manipulation. Others see right through straight faced denial of their own words: ....He promised a day or so ago he was holding back some juicy quotes to prove I'm anti-gun, a common ploy of persons on the margins looking for attention.... Proof? Apparently, the only legal evidence that you're pro gun is that you used to dive in frigid storm driven waters for lost guns. Note the past tense. Seems your position has evolved, ergo, now you're anti gun. Another totally Off-Topic Thread... another door opens where anything goes! Let's end this with an I.Q. test:
A true sign of mental illness is any gun owner who would vote for an Anti-Gunner like Joe Biden.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,381 Likes: 1
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,381 Likes: 1 |
The wealthy & well connected can get away w/o many provisions. Large government, social programs like social security, livable wages, firearms for personal defense,...... If problems arise they can hire team of lawyers, security detail,......
|
|
|
|
|