-
Anything ‘published’ on the web is viewed as intellectual property and, regardless of whether it displays a copyright symbol or not, is therefore copyrighted by the originator. The only exception to this is if there is a “free and unrestricted reuse” statement associated with the work.
In order to protect our members and TFL from possible litigation, all members must abide by the following new rules:
1. Copying and pasting entire articles from another site to TFL is strictly prohibited. The same applies to articles from print or other media, and to posting photographs taken of copyrighted pages or other media.
2. Copyright law provides for “fair use” of portions of a copyrighted work. You can copy no more than a SINGLE paragraph from the article to your post (3 or 4 sentences at most).
3. You must provide a link to the article along with the name of website. For example: ww.xxx.yyy/zzz (The Lower Thumbsuck Daily News).
4. You must provide, in your own words, a brief summary of the article AND your reasons for believing it will be of interest to TFL members. Failure to do so may result in the thread being closed or your post being deleted as a “cut and paste drive by.”
5. Photographs and other images are also copyrighted. "Hotlinking" of images (so that it appears in your message) from other sites is also prohibited unless you own rights to the image. If you wish to share an image, provide a clickable link to it.
Posts that do not follow these new guidelines will be altered or deleted by staff. Members who continue to violate this policy may lose their posting privileges at TFL.
Thank you for your cooperation and your participation in TFL, the leading online forum for firearms enthusiasts.
Closing L&P....
- Thread starter hoytinak
- Start date
- Status
I agree with you. Despite many best intentions, the temptation to sieze upon tangents is quite often too great to resist. Most would admit, even on posts with which they agree, many topics inappropriately manifest in L+P.
I think GD, if kept on the topic of firearms, can successfully capture the legal aspects without being quite so susceptible to irrelevant dialogue. For example, the thread on updates to Ohio CCW/castle needn't be closed or moved elsewhere, as it's unlikely to divert to peripheral election-related and party-bashing issues that tend to spawn personal attacks. Where it's a legal issue, a literal firearms tie-in to every post should suffice.
The political aspect is trickier, given the interconnectedness of issues, and heightened sensitivity and universal interest during presidential elections. As fun as amateur punditing is, I doubt any productive persuasion is occurring, so I'd be happy to see these arguments gone.
At any rate, it was at the very least clear that there was little effort being made to keep L+P on 2A related topics by the general membership. What was on-topic is probably still open to discussion in other subforums. Though disposed of in another thread, I would not think anything productive would come of an "off topic" or other catchall forum to give the political arguments or other junk back for discussion. The rest of the Internet's waiting anxiously for any and all baloney without starting a sandwich here.
I suppose the irony of getting in on this is it's in a way "TFL politics," and I am just another chump who probably comes off as liking to read my own typing.
The mod/admin team's got it all under control - this was just my way of expressing favor for the L+P cutoff.
I think GD, if kept on the topic of firearms, can successfully capture the legal aspects without being quite so susceptible to irrelevant dialogue. For example, the thread on updates to Ohio CCW/castle needn't be closed or moved elsewhere, as it's unlikely to divert to peripheral election-related and party-bashing issues that tend to spawn personal attacks. Where it's a legal issue, a literal firearms tie-in to every post should suffice.
The political aspect is trickier, given the interconnectedness of issues, and heightened sensitivity and universal interest during presidential elections. As fun as amateur punditing is, I doubt any productive persuasion is occurring, so I'd be happy to see these arguments gone.
At any rate, it was at the very least clear that there was little effort being made to keep L+P on 2A related topics by the general membership. What was on-topic is probably still open to discussion in other subforums. Though disposed of in another thread, I would not think anything productive would come of an "off topic" or other catchall forum to give the political arguments or other junk back for discussion. The rest of the Internet's waiting anxiously for any and all baloney without starting a sandwich here.
I suppose the irony of getting in on this is it's in a way "TFL politics," and I am just another chump who probably comes off as liking to read my own typing.
The mod/admin team's got it all under control - this was just my way of expressing favor for the L+P cutoff.The debate over the nature and function of L&P has long been a topic among the mods. Closing L&P was a mutual decision, solely by Dave and myself.
Whether or not L&P (or something similar) will be resurrected is something that all the mods will have to agree upon. I can pretty much guarantee that there will be a change in focus, should it arise from its ashes.
Please have patience, as Dave asked in the closing announcement.
Whether or not L&P (or something similar) will be resurrected is something that all the mods will have to agree upon. I can pretty much guarantee that there will be a change in focus, should it arise from its ashes.
Please have patience, as Dave asked in the closing announcement.
Offered with the utmost respect...
Why not take this timeout to discuss the problems and goals of the forum, in open forum? Mod's, and everyone else could contribute ideas, and hopefully the participants could gain some ownership of the revised groundrules.
Frankly, I've never understood why the internal workings of the forum must be treated as a state secret. And any questions about same must be confined to secret PM's. Ask-assertive management might be more successful than tell-assertive management?
In our sister forum, scuttling of the "political" section seemed a successful strongarm attempt by a couple mods to censor topics that were uncomfortable to their chosen profession. Just an observation.
I understand that they are very happy with the outcome, but I hope that isn't repeated here on TFL.
Anitpitas and bluesman have been even-handed with their moderating styles, on behalf of the forum thanks for your time and effort!
Why not take this timeout to discuss the problems and goals of the forum, in open forum? Mod's, and everyone else could contribute ideas, and hopefully the participants could gain some ownership of the revised groundrules.
Frankly, I've never understood why the internal workings of the forum must be treated as a state secret. And any questions about same must be confined to secret PM's. Ask-assertive management might be more successful than tell-assertive management?
In our sister forum, scuttling of the "political" section seemed a successful strongarm attempt by a couple mods to censor topics that were uncomfortable to their chosen profession. Just an observation.
I understand that they are very happy with the outcome, but I hope that isn't repeated here on TFL.
Anitpitas and bluesman have been even-handed with their moderating styles, on behalf of the forum thanks for your time and effort!
I have to say that the vast majority of my posts are in L&P. I tire of the endless debates of .45 versus 9mm; "What is the best gun for..." ; "What is the best caliber for..."; and the other endless repetitions that permeate other sections of the site.
Granted, I tired of the "Obama versus McCain" and other similar threads, as well as nearly any thread about Ron Paul.
With all that being said, I simply avoid areas and threads that do not interest me, and I would suggest that anyone else who does not like L&P discussions do the same. The loss of L&P would make this board of little use to me, and cause me to move on for the most part. I suspect that will be the case with quite a few others.
Note that the sister site broke off their political forum instead of eliminating it. Perhaps that could be an option here.
Granted, I tired of the "Obama versus McCain" and other similar threads, as well as nearly any thread about Ron Paul.
With all that being said, I simply avoid areas and threads that do not interest me, and I would suggest that anyone else who does not like L&P discussions do the same. The loss of L&P would make this board of little use to me, and cause me to move on for the most part. I suspect that will be the case with quite a few others.
Note that the sister site broke off their political forum instead of eliminating it. Perhaps that could be an option here.
I'd like to add my voice to the
"let it stand" chorus.
Yeah, the signal to noise ratio in a political forum can get pretty out of whack. This has been the case in every online political discussion I've been part of, going all the way back to the days of BBS's and FidoNet. I have seen more vibrant political forums killed off by exessive moderation than by under-moderation.
THough it has recovered well, and is likely more in line with what the site owners wanted (else they'd change it), I still think that the change over at THR was a mistake. The discussion there has become much more narrowly focused than here. As it stood, I think both perspectives were valuable, but I'm afraid that the mods here are running the risk of turning the on-line RKBA discussion into a monoculture, where there is not a widely-read forum for free expression of views on an set of issues which are deeply felt and intensely political.
The ideals of human freedom that form part of all of our devotion to the right to right to the means of force deserve a place of fullest expression. I have been gratified to take part in discussions here where my ideas, which, while they fully align with the purely RKBA portion of the discussion, are decidedly in the minority on other matters, can be attacked full-force by those who disagree. Such fora are, in my experience, rare. Too many online fora, even those I enthusiastically participate in, tend toward the "preaching to the choir" end of things.
Maybe a time-out until the election is done is the best option. Of course, as it's not my site, it's not my call.
--Shannon
"let it stand" chorus.
Yeah, the signal to noise ratio in a political forum can get pretty out of whack. This has been the case in every online political discussion I've been part of, going all the way back to the days of BBS's and FidoNet. I have seen more vibrant political forums killed off by exessive moderation than by under-moderation.
THough it has recovered well, and is likely more in line with what the site owners wanted (else they'd change it), I still think that the change over at THR was a mistake. The discussion there has become much more narrowly focused than here. As it stood, I think both perspectives were valuable, but I'm afraid that the mods here are running the risk of turning the on-line RKBA discussion into a monoculture, where there is not a widely-read forum for free expression of views on an set of issues which are deeply felt and intensely political.
The ideals of human freedom that form part of all of our devotion to the right to right to the means of force deserve a place of fullest expression. I have been gratified to take part in discussions here where my ideas, which, while they fully align with the purely RKBA portion of the discussion, are decidedly in the minority on other matters, can be attacked full-force by those who disagree. Such fora are, in my experience, rare. Too many online fora, even those I enthusiastically participate in, tend toward the "preaching to the choir" end of things.
Maybe a time-out until the election is done is the best option. Of course, as it's not my site, it's not my call.
--Shannon
And flush away a very useful and thought provoking forum? A cost/benefit analysis before making such a summarily dismissive statement is in order, dont you think?
I miss the L&P forum and wish it was brought back. I spent a lot of time and energy there. To see it "flushed away" because some narrow minded member thinks its "best" to do so without giving a good reason why is pretty why L&P got shut down in the first place...useless or trollish posts that added nothing to the actual discussion.
Slugthrower
New member
I find it not unexpected that L&P was closed as many don't debate from a intellectual perspective, rather they approach it from an emotional aspect.
The irony is that many subjects that concern fellow members here on TFL are political and legal in nature.
I hope that there is a way to continue the L&P section of the forum and with the civility that we all deserve. It may be a bit much to ask but if one cannot respond to a particular subject with a modicum of objectivity instead of a predominantly subjective response don't post.
I am guilty of letting my emotions get the better of me. That was quite a while back and it was foolish on my part. Thanks to the reasonableness of the moderators here on TFL I am still a member.
A culling of the herd could happen and it would be deserved. That isn't our call as members on TFL though.
The irony is that many subjects that concern fellow members here on TFL are political and legal in nature.
I hope that there is a way to continue the L&P section of the forum and with the civility that we all deserve. It may be a bit much to ask but if one cannot respond to a particular subject with a modicum of objectivity instead of a predominantly subjective response don't post.
I am guilty of letting my emotions get the better of me. That was quite a while back and it was foolish on my part. Thanks to the reasonableness of the moderators here on TFL I am still a member.
A culling of the herd could happen and it would be deserved. That isn't our call as members on TFL though.
Another member in one of the other threads remarked that the biggest issue he saw was not enough mods, four, to properly monitor the L&P forum. I kind of agree.
I was banned from L&P for 2 months for when I want over the top, so why not do the same for these people who are causing problems? I didn't think the problem was as bad as the mods seem to think. If anything, more mods to monitor and also encouraging members to report posts they think go over the top would have brought things back down a bit.
I was banned from L&P for 2 months for when I want over the top, so why not do the same for these people who are causing problems? I didn't think the problem was as bad as the mods seem to think. If anything, more mods to monitor and also encouraging members to report posts they think go over the top would have brought things back down a bit.
grymster2007
New member
I've seen calls for more moderators, and while I agree it would probably help, I can't imagine it would be easy to come up with them. Most of our existing moderators seem to have day jobs, are not paid for this and expecting more would be unreasonable. I also think that moderators on a forum such as this need to be carefully chosen. Just think how it might run with some of our more flamboyant members in charge.
More mods to police for personal insults, racist and homophobic slurs combined with a thicker skin for any who go in there. I can't help but think most complaints are from people whose particular of was gored effectively so it is easier to cry foul than admit error, respond effectively or shut up. I say let L&P roll.
Political arguments often deteriorate into personal mud-slinging. In the past, in real life, people have been beaten or killed for voting a certain way. Most people feel very strongly about who will govern them and what laws they might make. Discussions about Palin's new "action figure" or Obama's heritage are not appropriate. Their views on guns ARE.
But...don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
L&P contained many interesting and informative threads dealing with our rights and laws concerning firearms. These subjects need a place to be heard and discussed. Perhaps a replacement thread could be "GUN LAW", and concern only that subject.
Frankly, seems to me the closing of the forum was the final act of the Moderators in admitting they'd let it get out of hand and couldn't control it any more. They couldn't do their job, so they eliminated the problem.
Y'all gave in...and the whole Forum population lost.
But...don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
L&P contained many interesting and informative threads dealing with our rights and laws concerning firearms. These subjects need a place to be heard and discussed. Perhaps a replacement thread could be "GUN LAW", and concern only that subject.
Frankly, seems to me the closing of the forum was the final act of the Moderators in admitting they'd let it get out of hand and couldn't control it any more. They couldn't do their job, so they eliminated the problem.
Y'all gave in...and the whole Forum population lost.
I agree. OK, I'll volunteer to Mod a new L&P-type of forum. Maybe something in the style of my suggestion in my recent post here.
I have experience in being President of a large radio control club, a retail store manager, and several other areas. Decision making-type jobs. You give me firm rules and I'll enforce them. And even abide by them.
It'd be nice to have the forum back. There's quite a bit of information coming out that would help refute some of the statements that have are now part of TFL's archives and thus "on the record".
If the goal is to clean things up, then any sanctions or punishments applicable to L&P need to be applicable to every forum because the same problems exist there.
If the goal is to clean things up, then any sanctions or punishments applicable to L&P need to be applicable to every forum because the same problems exist there.
IMHO with no disrespect intended the mods on this forum are the heaviest handed of any I've seen anywhere. There's too many with the I'm right you're wrong concept and somebody always wants to start an argument. It's not going to change no matter how many new rules or how many more mods you add. Most forums I belong to have already done away with any and all political discussions because it simply doesn't work.
One thing that keeps a mod from being "heavy handed" is one I have employed against myself on forums that I have moderated in the past:
I would never attempt to moderate a thread in which I was a participant. I find that it is much more difficult to be objective when you are immersed in the discussion at hand.
Of course, I was the lone objectivist on a Liberal-leaning board that dealt with credit issues and financial advice. The policy there was "no political threads." I noticed that threads frequently were political, and that other mods and administrators were participating. The other mods would only close threads or delete posts that were not in keeping with the liberal viewpoint they all shared. In trying to keep dissension amongst moderators private, I pointed that out in the mod-only forum. I was removed as a mod and banned from the site.
I would never attempt to moderate a thread in which I was a participant. I find that it is much more difficult to be objective when you are immersed in the discussion at hand.
Of course, I was the lone objectivist on a Liberal-leaning board that dealt with credit issues and financial advice. The policy there was "no political threads." I noticed that threads frequently were political, and that other mods and administrators were participating. The other mods would only close threads or delete posts that were not in keeping with the liberal viewpoint they all shared. In trying to keep dissension amongst moderators private, I pointed that out in the mod-only forum. I was removed as a mod and banned from the site.
Many parallels to gun rights.
Closing L&P is not the solution. More rules are not the solution. Just enforce the current rules. Ban people that don't follow the rules. Just like gun crime, we don't need more rules, just enforce the existing rules.
Many times, L&P is the only forum that has any topics worth discussing.
Don't let a few idiots ruin the forum for the rest of us. Just like we don't want a few irresponsible gun owners to ruin our 2nd Amendment rights.
Closing L&P is not the solution. More rules are not the solution. Just enforce the current rules. Ban people that don't follow the rules. Just like gun crime, we don't need more rules, just enforce the existing rules.
Many times, L&P is the only forum that has any topics worth discussing.
Don't let a few idiots ruin the forum for the rest of us. Just like we don't want a few irresponsible gun owners to ruin our 2nd Amendment rights.
I saw the announcement that declared the L+P closed and went through the follow-up thread (it got closed down) which led me to a search where I found this one still open.
As several other newcomers here have said before me, I was drawn to this forum partly by L+P and the fact that the mods seem a bit more lenient than at THR, my next choice forum, and I don't believe closing it is a good choice for TFL as a whole.
(Reading the closed threads is a priority to me.)
Already mentioned by others is the possible need for more mods. This, along with enforcing existing rules banning violators temporarily or permanently sounds very reasonable to me.
But what I got really enthusiastic about was Jimpeels suggestion of changing the colour of your name in the box on the left from the present blue to, say bright red for those who are in trouble and then clearly indicating them as "banned", when they are banned. This would be a very clear, tangible step and could be extended to include threads which are in danger of being closed as well.
I suppose people will argue that this would be a beacon for trolls who would congregate at these threads like flies, but that's precisely the point. It would (I assume) be very easy to run searches on members who contribute to such threads and subsequently ban them as necessary.
) which led me to a search where I found this one still open.As several other newcomers here have said before me, I was drawn to this forum partly by L+P and the fact that the mods seem a bit more lenient than at THR, my next choice forum, and I don't believe closing it is a good choice for TFL as a whole.
(Reading the closed threads is a priority to me
.)Already mentioned by others is the possible need for more mods. This, along with enforcing existing rules banning violators temporarily or permanently sounds very reasonable to me.
But what I got really enthusiastic about was Jimpeels suggestion of changing the colour of your name in the box on the left from the present blue to, say bright red for those who are in trouble and then clearly indicating them as "banned", when they are banned. This would be a very clear, tangible step and could be extended to include threads which are in danger of being closed as well.
I suppose people will argue that this would be a beacon for trolls who would congregate at these threads like flies, but that's precisely the point. It would (I assume) be very easy to run searches on members who contribute to such threads and subsequently ban them as necessary.
- Status