Apparently, there is a politics and religion forum that one must request to join, that is not visible to the general forum members.

Also, there is an open "Gun Talk" section not limited to Sig.

Just FYI

quote:

Originally posted by CharlieSW:
Apparently, there is a politics and religion forum that one must request to join, that is not visible to the general forum members.

Delicate subjects, then? Not fit for general access. Wouldn't want to offend anyone, or give them anything to think about...

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by CharlieSW:
Apparently, there is a politics and religion forum that one must request to join, that is not visible to the general forum members.

Delicate subjects, then? Not fit for general access. Wouldn't want to offend anyone, or give them anything to think about...

^^^^THIS^^^^

Does it not occur to the administrators that members can simply choose to not open threads with this subject matter, or, if a thread title is vague or misleading, back out of the thread after determining the actual subject matter?

Forums dealing with firearms as their primary subject matter are, of course, intended for adults. Adults should not need to be protected from discussions which deal with important matters such as politics and religion; they can simply choose to not participate in such discussions.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Does it not occur to the administrators that members can simply choose to not open threads with this subject matter, or, if a thread title is vague or misleading, back out of the thread after determining the actual subject matter?

Forums dealing with firearms as their primary subject matter are, of course, intended for adults. Adults should not need to be protected from discussions which deal with important matters such as politics and religion; they can simply choose to not participate in such discussions.

I think this may be the reason that I am a member of a number of gun forums, but that this forum is by far my favorite. Thank you for saying this, sir.

IIRC, the Admin made the Politics & Religion section one you had to sign up for and hold them harmless for any mental problems you had after going there.

Before they did that, there were a ton of complains from members about that section.

quote:

Originally posted by Flash-LB
Before they did that, there were a ton of complains from members about that section.

What was the nature of the complaints? Did members not care for a particular political perspective? Were members upset that religion was being discussed at all, or was it more that certain remarks about religion were regarded as inappropriate?

Most forums recently have moved politics to a more controlled setting. It's the idea that they could be deplatformed - Arfcom was - and that the discussion online had turned into a highly contentious confrontation.

I've had posts moved to political - they just "disappear" and no way to access them until I sign up. Since that has been a internet gun forum wide trend over the last few years there isn't much to say or do about it in a forum. There are other places to take that and so far it's been satisfying getting the feedback comments are getting there.

That leaves gun forums as mostly technical discussions of the firearm of interest, which reduces the interaction. I probably spend less than 30% of my online time or less on forums now, glance thru the new topics and then move on. First rule is, post on what you know primarily, keeps from being ignorant - we already post about "gun store clerks," don't be one. Second is watch how the forum is moderated, and how your response might affect your credibility.

Having posts moved or removed because they aren't part of the mainstream thinking just means the information was too advanced and caused the observer mental distress their world view couldn't accept - like, aborigines seeing their first plane land, another human gets out, different skin color they've never seen. Fear set in and the first reaction is Keel it! so they do.

Nobody liked Glocks in 1985 - it took years to overcome some blatantly silly notions. Like, the plastic cracking and falling apart in your hands while shooting it. Long term rental range reports show nope, they get slide cracks, and it takes 90k rounds to do it. The 1911's are the ones which fall apart, and many by 45k, including SIG's according to the biggest rental range in Vegas.

After 40 years of controversy over it, the results are exactly BACKWARDS from what was first thought. That is how far behind most Americans can be on the average subject. We could list about half a dozen real smart ideas from the last 18 months - yet half the members here are not nor will be prepared to accept the conclusions and we will have to wait years for them to catch up.

It's if we try to prevent having influencers on some subjects yet welcome them with open arms in others, especially in the commercialization of our hobby. As said, don't open the thread if you can't take the direction it's going, but there is another pernicious and difficult factor - there are paid influencers, working for corporations openly soliciting contracts, who can and do intrude in some forums to deliberately control information and who work night and day to steer the conversation to their agenda.

Of late that is the main source of a lot of the dissension in forum political conversations and its amazing that when you search for the subject online there are hundreds of references yet within a forum it's treated as if its not happening.

Well, 800,000 children a year go missing, but in daily life a lot of folks have their head in the sand ignoring it. And before somebody demands a link, open a window and search for it first instead of considering it impossible. A sentient adult can do that - a shill will not. There is one "tell" to highlight how to see if a poster is actually part of a community or just in it for the clicks.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by Flash-LB
Before they did that, there were a ton of complains from members about that section.

What was the nature of the complaints? Did members not care for a particular political perspective? Were members upset that religion was being discussed at all, or was it more that certain remarks about religion were regarded as inappropriate?

Pretty much all of the above plus people actually complained that reading some posts were mentally disturbing without explaining what that meant in specific terms.

So the admin said you had to sign in, essentially sign a waiver just as you do in shooting ranges and hold them harmless.

quote:

Originally posted by Flash-LB:
...people actually complained that reading some posts were mentally disturbing without explaining what that meant in specific terms.

Picture if you will, gentlemen, the scene, had members of this forum tried to pull that kind of adolescent, victimhood horse shit here.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: parabellum,

I am a member also over there and still post once in a while but I find being a member here much more rewarding and feel I am with the "adults" here. Over there it is more like junior high school time.

Other than banning people for supposed violations of policy including anything an admin may construe as racist, etc the forum is largely unmoderated and stupid pointless threads can go on for dozens and dozens of pages such as "my gun is better than your gun" and then "no, my gun is better than your gun" over and over and over without ever being locked.

Oh and the Glock hate is very high over there with many useless and childish threads about Glocks and how inferior they are. Someone actually posted this with thread title "Another Glock failure" - "The gunman in Brooklyn today chose the wrong pistol - a glock (it jammed). Glad he did instead of taking a Sig."

Their filtering is insane and even words such crap and ass will show as astericks.

quote:

Originally posted by grumpy1:
I am a member also over there and still post once in a while but I find being a member here much more rewarding and feel I am with the "adults" here. Over there it is more like junior high school time.

Other than banning people for supposed violations of policy including anything an admin may construe as racist, etc the forum is largely unmoderated and stupid pointless threads can go on for dozens and dozens of pages such as "my gun is better than your gun" and then "no, my gun is better than your gun" over and over and over without ever being locked.

Oh and the Glock hate is very high over there with many useless and childish threads about Glocks and how inferior they are. Someone actually posted this with thread title "Another Glock failure" - "The gunman in Brooklyn today chose the wrong pistol - a glock (it jammed). Glad he did instead of taking a Sig."

Their filtering is insane and even words such crap and ass will show as astericks.

Quit being so grumpy....lol.

quote:

Picture if you will, gentlemen, the scene, had members of this forum tried to pull that kind adolescent, victimhood horse shit here.

It would do my heart well to watch this go down.

I'm pretty sure I found SigTalk first, and found SigForum because of it.

I stopped looking in there so long ago, I don't remember what turned me off.

quote:

Originally posted by grumpy1:
Other than banning people for supposed violations of policy including anything an admin may construe as racist, etc the forum is largely unmoderated and stupid pointless threads can go on for dozens and dozens of pages such as "my gun is better than your gun" and then "no, my gun is better than your gun" over and over and over without ever being locked.

The picture is coming into focus now.

quote:

Oh and the Glock hate is very high over there with many useless and childish threads about Glocks and how inferior they are. Someone actually posted this with thread title "Another Glock failure" - "The gunman in Brooklyn today chose the wrong pistol - a glock (it jammed). Glad he did instead of taking a Sig."

Yes, coming into focus.

Glocks are at least as functionally reliable as SIGs, and probably even more so, and in terms of durability, just about any Glock will take far higher round counts than the aluminum frame SIGs. Typically, the first part to fail in high round count Glocks is the trigger spring, which gives up the ghost at somewhere north of 30,000 rounds. That for gen 1 through 4. The gen 5s, well, who knows when that part breaks, but it's going to be at a higher number of rounds. The polymer SIGs, I couldn't tell you, but something tells me that these will still not beat Glock durability.

Fanboi nonsense is not tolerated in SIGforum. We seek the truth. I own plenty of SIGs and some of them are priceless to me, but let's get real.

quote:

Their filtering is insane and even words such crap and ass will show as astericks.

Again, firearms discussion forums cater to adults. Adults do not need to be shielded from profanity, whether or not they themselves use it. Just about every person in America has heard every profane word by the time they reach high school. Add to that that the overwhelming majority of members of firearms discussion forums are male and, well, it's a no-brainer.

This is not to say that SIGforum does not place reasonable limits on the use of profanity; most certainly, we do. If a person goes overboard in terms of frequency of use, or if they are particularly, pointlessly vulgar, they will be told to cool their jets. Additionally this forum has a long-standing rule which states there should be no profanity in subject lines, not even self-censored profanity using asterisks or the like, but we do not expect grown men to behave like choir boys and we do not cater to those who feel that they must be coddled. We'll leave the hypocrisy to others.

When someone gets banned or has their pee-pee snacked, they run to the Sig Talk forum and cry about their mistreatment on the "Green Site". It's usually good for a laugh.

quote:

Originally posted by Johnny 3eagles:
When someone gets banned or has their pee-pee snacked, they run to the Sig Talk forum and cry about their mistreatment on the "Green Site". It's usually good for a laugh.

It's a known fact that no one has ever been banned from a web forum for cause. Just like prison, everyone who gets banned is innocent.

And then, they climb into the trees and fling shit. Because they're innocent, you see. Wronged, they were- a grave injustice dealt to them.

For the more than two decades of this forum, there has been a policy- rarely excepted- that we do not allow members to speak ill of other forums. But, since in this case, it's not reciprocal, I'm making an exception.



The truth of the matter is that you have to try quite hard to get banned from this forum. Regular members know it. Multiple warnings are issued, in no uncertain terms, and as a matter of fact, I've become more and more patient in such circumstances over the years. In instances where I would have banned members in years past, I've taken to saying "Let me know if you have trouble finding the door," which is an invitation for them to leave, but they retain their posting rights, just in case the little light bulb above their head should fizzle to life, in which case they might begin behaving themselves. I think that's pretty generous, if I do say so myself.

I think sometimes Sigforum management doesn't give itself credit for the monitoring of this site. The ability to determine when a member has crossed the line and needs to be "nudged" back toward the center is an art, not a science. (Note: I have been nudged a few times and became a better member for it!)

Allowing political and religious discussions requires judicious monitoring to avoid losing members to over-control or out-of-control. Most forums just choose to not go there. We are very fortunate to have the leeway we enjoy.

"pee pee snacked?"...lol.

The only other forum I sometimes visit keeps controversial subjects segregated from the general forum to prevent offending their advertisers. The lack of advertisers makes Sigforum immune to this pressure, making it a much better place to visit and have truly independent discussions.