• 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.

Suggestions for Envigorating L&P

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Al Norris

Moderator Emeritus
Hammer4nc, offered a suggestion with this post. In that spirit, this thread is open to suggestions.

Let me start off by saying that the Legal and Political forum, in all probability will not be resurrected, in its current form. Politics has always been somewhat of a bane to the forum. This has been made extremely clear over the last year and a half.

What Dave and I believe will work, is to start a new forum that would encompass Legal and Civil Rights (mainly BOR and 2A) issues. Politics should not enter into it, except as a peripheral issue, and then only briefly.

With the above in mind, what are some of your thoughts?
 
Last edited:
Antipitas

Let us start by determining just exactly what you and Bluesman think the biggest single problem is.
 
That would be an excellent idea. That would allow members to discuss issues like Florida's new guns in parking lots law or Bloomberg's lawsuits, while avoiding endless right versus left and Ron Paul debates.
 
Well, in that spirit here is the PM I sent to Bluesman:

I would say half my posts are in L&P and have long appreciated the forum. It is clear that there has been some unrestrained emotion of late, as well as a fair share of "intentionally disruptive" posters...

While I understand your immediate decision I do hope we can get back to an open L&P forum. That may not be possible though until after November. In the meantime I make the suggestion that we limit L&P to FIREARMS RELATED POSTS. There are plenty of firearms issues in L&P without going down the path of Iraq, gay rights, abortion, etc.

Loosing all discussion on the L&P aspects of firearms would be a very bad thing for this forum. It will cause worthwhile contributors to go elsewhere. I probably post 20:1 here rather than elsewhere because I do enjoy the political aspects of the discussions and look at news presented in them on 2A issues as critical. Without that discussion I will look to other sights first, then TFL when I get around to it as opposed to the other way around.

After November when the trolls slink back to under their bridges and the emotional fever has passed hopefully we can get back to an open L&P forum requiring only a sane level of moderation as opposed to the insanity we have now.

That is my hopefully helpful input. Thank you for running this forum and of course any decision you make on running it is fully within your rights.

Best regards,

Musketeer
 
I rarely post but do enjoy reading the debates held in L&P. I would also note I spend much less time on the High Road since they closed political discussion. I find the level of discourse is still pretty civil and rational as compared to someplace like either DU or CU.
 
Legal and civil rights seems like a good way to go.

Not as emotional and not as likely to arrouse personal feelings as political does/would. Still allows discussion on the second ammendment and other gun related legal issues.
 
A lot of forums have a tough time with political posts. It is just hard to stay civil, and mods tend to pull he trigger a little more often when their own chains are being pulled, which annoys those doing the pulling even more, and makes it even less civil.

I like a good political discussion, and really I have not seen a whole lot that is real offensive here. maybe it gets deleted before I get a chance to see it.

IMO, creating posting rules that are meaningful is the key. You can't just say it is up to the mod's discretion and have the members feel they are being treated fairly. But writing those rules in a concise and understandable way is not a trivial task.
 
After November when the trolls slink back to under their bridges and the emotional fever has passed hopefully we can get back to an open L&P forum requiring only a sane level of moderation as opposed to the insanity we have now.
Click to expand...

I agree with Musketeer about this. L&P is an excellent forum. When the discussion is (mostly) civil, many of the threads are interesting, and I find reading them (along with posting occasionally) helps me to clarify my own thinking on quite a few topics...

As someone who's a relatively new member, though quite a long-time reader, I hesitate to ask this but will anyway: Is it technically feasible to ban the folks who can't seem to post there without getting abusive/irrational, but only from L&P? It seems a pity to cut them off entirely... Or would this be too much like some sort of 2nd-class citizenship?
 
As one of the prior bad actors in L&P (see People vs Molineaux for a description of the prior bad act rule:p) and a big time offender, I would note that if you limit the forum to Legal and Civil rights, it will cut down some of the invective, but you will still get:

Post 1. The ATF is trying to shut down Jims Guns!

Reply: Those Jackbooted thugs! Everyone should be able to buy whatever they want at anytime.

Reply: Actually, that gun shop has been violating the law for quite some time.

Reply: You traitor to our natural born rights. You should be shot!

Reply: How can we allow guns to be controlled and still allow abortions...can you imagine if Hussien Osama gets elected?

Reply: Great, I see the far right loons are coming ouit of the woodwork

Reply: Who are you calling a loon?

Reply: He must be a Demonkrat

Reply: You guys give a bad image to gun owners.

Reply: Your post demonstrates you are far out of the mainstream!

Reply: Traitor. You and the Supreme Court both. You are a sheeple!

Reply: The sheeple need to know where we stand!

Reply: Who are you calling a demonkrat! Lets step outside!

Reply: Your mother wears army boots.

Reply: Better army boots than being a sheeple....baaaaaaaaaaah

Reply: I can't beleive these Neocons!

Et seq, ad infinitum, ad nauseum

WilditsgonnabetoughandgosarahgoAlaska ™
 
...mods tend to pull he trigger a little more often when their own chains are being pulled,
Click to expand...
Maybe in other forums, but on TFL both Al and I tend to be more lenient with the people we disagree with so we don't appear to be biased. Unfortunately, this inevitably leads to our ideological comrades being angry at us for allowing incoming invective while prohibiting outgoing.

The biggest headache for me in the past eight years as a moderator is veiled insults, borderline personal attacks and closed minds. The first two are very difficult to address because it is a judgment call every time and I strive to be fair. The last headache amounts to two people in a room yelling "IS NOT!" "IS SO!" "IS NOT!" "IS SO!" over and over and over and over... Nobody is listening, nobody has an open mind, nobody even considers that the other person might have a point.

It comes down to a general lack of respect. And that, is a very difficult trait to instill into adults who are convinced that they're right.

-Dave
 
Leave it closed

I think WildAlaska is correct. No matter the incarnation, any forum that has even the faintest whiff of politics will degenerate into name-calling and mindless grandstanding. Good luck making your decision.
 
I enjoyed legal and political quite a bit. It inspired me to do my own research.

I understand why ya'll want to close it, and I'm not asking you to re-open it, but I am curious as to where I can find a forum on which I can have mentally stimulating discussions about current events and historical happenings once again.

The best part was that if I got bored of politics I could always post about one of my other great past times, firearms. They both fascinate me, and it is sad to me that we cannot have a forum where both can be responsibly discussed.

Finally, I am not claiming to have always been the most responsible poster (I called some people members of the "Brady bunch," etc.), but I think I learned to be more considerate and less irresponsible with my posts, so that being said, I did learn quite a bit from L&P.
 
Dave said:
... veiled insults, borderline personal attacks and closed minds. ... It comes down to a general lack of respect.
Click to expand...
I would like everyone reading this to think about what I'm about to write. Please, do not respond to it, in this thread (if you absolutely must, your post will be deleted when next I see it). I just want you folks to think about it:

We have had 2 fairly new members come on board and post some of their thoughts to L&P. From a perspective of living in a small rural conservative town in Idaho, their posts are straight out of mainstream American thought. Like it or not. Yet, many who posted in L&P had no trouble with outright calling them all sorts of names, or alluding to their parentage, etc. Hardly a single person who raised their shrill voices to drown either of these two gentlemen's voices, had an open enough mind to see their POV.

If you have failed to see what I'm talking about, perhaps I should point to the Ron Paul threads. Here, we see the same exact thing. People who are so closed minded that any other viewpoint was tantamount to treason.

This is beyond being merely sad. It is a direct reflection of how reactionary some of you are. It is a direct reflection on TFL as a whole. It goes against the credo of our board and paints us all as knuckle-dragging neanderthals.

For those reasons, I'm against further political discourse.
Wildalaska said:
I would note that if you limit the forum to Legal and Civil rights, it will cut down some of the invective, but you will still get:[list redacted]
Click to expand...
If the thread start is not directly related to Civil Rights, then the thread gets closed and the thread starter gets yanked. If any posts within the thread gets tangentially political, that post gets deleted and that member gets yanked. Simple enough rule?

Hard and fast consequences: No Second Chances; No Argument; No Trial; No Way.

Ken, under that scenario, everyone who responded in such a manner would get yanked.

Folks would either discuss things in an adult and rational manner or our jobs as mods would get really easy, 'cause no one is posting! :D

In short, I want to see the bar raised so high, that those of you that are disrespectful of the opinions of others, either won't post or can't post.

OK then. The above is just my personal rant. It lets all of you know how I've felt about this subject for some time now. So there you have it. Dave's thoughts on the problem areas and mine.

So suggest away! :cool:
 
Simple enough rule?
Click to expand...

Heck, even I could follow that one :)

But Al (and Dave) realistically, how you gonna enforce that? Look at my example (excessive as it is)...what is Legal/Civil Rights what is political? Gonna ban the word sheeple? JBT? I guess Demonkrat would be a nono....thank god...Lets say a discussion is started re an interlocutory decision in Heller II.....what about the invective that necessarily will be spouted about the Wash DC city council's total disregard of the Courts decision? Legal? Political....isnt an issue of fact in such a proceeding a predecessor for political discussion?

Speaking for me, its my lack of tolerance for invective that gets me into trouble, which made me engage in puerile bickering.

The word sheeple alone makes me see red.

WildsarahsarahsarahAlaska TM
 
One the verge of an national election that is likely to favor democrats in congress; led by a known anti-gun Obama/or a minority-party McCain, as the next president; how likely is it, that firearms rights will be sacrificed on the political altar of government-promised security, in the next 4 years? Arguably, pretty likely.

Given that scenario, I can't imagine a worse time to abandon 2A-oriented political discussion. Despite the frustrations that come with moderating such a forum.

Some of the frustration might arise from unrealistic expectations, that the discussion must always stay in the neatly manicured fairway. Even Tiger Woods hits some shots into the rough, and, some of his most creative shots come when recovering from these flubs. None of us here is The Tiger Woods of internet debate. While we strive for high standards (expressed as signal-to-noise, think twice/post once, etc.), we'll all shank a few. Millions of hackers manage the frustration, and try to recover on the next shot, instead of breaking their 6-iron over their knee and stomping off the course. Advancing political ideas is infinitely more complex than putting a little ball in a hole, IMO.

Other frustrations may be built into the software. Some mention is made that archived posts may be dredged up to reflect poorly on gun owners. According to the banner page, we're now at 3 million + posts. Is it necessary/desirable that all threads/posts be archived? How about just archiving those threads (or posts) that rise high above the noise level? A positive-option system (clicks by moderators and/or members), necessary to keep a great thread or post from dying after some set time period? Could this be accomplished easily? Would it ultimately conserve server resources, and moderator time? Would we be more proud of the resultant archive? A TFL hall of fame?

Seems like the system for handling non-conforming posts could be streamlined, for efficiency, and to avoid hurt feelings. To use another sports analogy (soccer), some kind of yellow-card/red-card system with clear guidelines and cumulative consequences for violations. PM's seem to be extremely labor-intensive; the system almost guarantees frustration.

If I read the management posts correctly, the ax may have already fallen, and further suggestions, at this point, are futile. Perhaps forum software makes improvements impossible. The shell is what, 9 years+ old now? That's beyond eternity. Maybe some computer whiz can incorporate these ideas into a new shell, or maybe better ones already exists, I don't know.

So, its been entertaining, perhaps we'll meet up on some other venue. :)
 
I have to say that the L&P forum was one reason why I frequented TFL more than THR. I and others are probably going to be looking elsewhere now for another forum. (Looking in my bookmarks and bringing some other forums up to the bookmarks toolbar.) I didn't see L&P getting to be such a problem, though I don't read all the threads.

There was some heated debate and some name calling, if that was such a problem who not start banning people from the L&P forums like you did with me a few months ago when I went a little over the top?

I see this move hurting more than helping in the long run.
 
I think I understand where the animosity comes from. The readiness to go for the cheap shot or the personal attack, just because someone disagrees.

The state of political discourse on this site is just a reflection of the sad state our nations political discourse is in.

The extreme right and left in this country espouses their respective ideologies in such a way as there is no room for compromise and those 'moderates' that do seek consensus and compromise are labeled as spineless, wishy washy or perhaps traitors to their party and/or country.

The contempt people have for certain political figures and political ideologies, often fueled by whichever political commentator/s they most identify with, bleeds over into their discourse and they project that contempt onto those who disagree with them and their chosen ideology.

I don't have a fix for it, I don't think people can be depended on to 'self moderate,' at least when it comes to discussing politics. They take it personally, to much of what makes up their whole world view is invested in their political ideology. An attack on their deep held political beliefs is perceived as an attack on them and they take it just as personally as if someone attacked their religious beliefs.

Do I think I'm above it all and somehow immune to this syndrome? Not hardly, I've been guilty of attacking others for their opinions or what they thought of mine, on several occasions.

In closing I would like to say that I enjoyed the L&P section and the spirited debates we had there, I wish it didn't have to change or go away, but I don't know a method to force civility on people as they discuss contentious political topics.
 
I think de-invigorate considering the heated rhetoric.

While I agree with nate45 that the state of political discourse has fallen, I doubt that there was ever a golden age of reasoned discourse on this board.

This from 2000
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25571
Here's a fun thing to do at night while practicing your pistol skills. Tune in to the Clinton News Network (CNN) or CNBC etc.. Shows like larry King and Geraldo. You can even mute them if it churns your stomach too much. Take out your favorite pistol (make sure it's unloaded!) and dry fire at Larry, Heraldo, Al-Gore, etc...
Click to expand...

Now as someone who was suspended one month for sarcastically calling Hillary Clinton a B!+ch, I wonder why a similar solution wouldn't work for people who are now using intemperate rhetoric.

Of course it's easier to patrol for bad words because they are self evident. The rhetorical violence of snark and innuendo is harder to judge. There are no hard and fast rules as to what bait is innocent and which is trollish. But that is a moderator's job.
The election's over in three months. Just give three months down time to offenders.

I'm a moderator on a board myself. We had lots of problems with the internecine warfare between Hillary and Obama supporters. After the primary was over the warfare ended. It will probably do the same thing here after the election.
 
nate45 said:
The state of political discourse on this site is just a reflection of the sad state our nations political discourse is in.
Click to expand...

A few minutes ago I opened the Drudge Report, these were some of the headlines....

Dems sharpen personal attacks on McCain-Palin...

Video: Obama 'pig' jab...

McCain camp angry...

OBAMA: 'LIPSTICK ON A PIG, STILL A PIG'

OBAMA QUESTIONS MCCAIN'S HONOR...

NY Gov. accuses McCain campaign of veiled racism; 'Community organizer' another way of saying 'black'...

Thats some of the political news of the day and reflects the current state of our national political discourse.

Now I'm positive that were L&P still open, one or more of these stories, would become the subject of a new thread.

With our would be leaders themselves engaging in puerile bickering and personal attacks, how could it not spill over into a discussion of it, given the current highly partisan atmosphere?

L&P posters are being held to a higher standard than the very politicians we are discussing.

Not that thats a bad thing, too bad their isn't a way to moderate the Obama and McCain campaigns.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top