~~ WHO Was Banned Today? #2 ~~

[ArcadiaGP]

yourself included, who come here for no other reason but to post hot-button issues in the political forum and contribute next to nothing in any of the shooting/hunting/firearms sections

Respectfully disagree being lumped into this category. I'm here as a firearms enthusiast first and foremost. I am quite active in the "Carry Issues" subforum.

I'd ask that your personal disliking for the politics subforum (and possibly its members) be left out of discussion?

Would you consider relinquishing your moderation over that specific forum, given how negatively you view it? Honest question. You have a strong opinion against it... I don't know if that has anything to do with how you moderate it though. I certainly don't have an answer for that, or know what all goes behind the scenes... but this post is the first time I've seen how you feel about it.

I certainly don't disagree with some of the things you're saying about it though. It definitely causes the most drama on the forum... but I think it covers important topics at times.

As you point out, I have no control over what is posted in this thread. All I can do is ask for the posters assistance in staying on topic and away from griping about the forum. There are plenty of threads to gripe about INGO, especially those designed for such in the Forum/Support section.

I follow too many threads. The one you're suggesting is barely on-topic as-is. But, with respect to your request, I have no further discussion to carry out in this thread unless I'm addressed further above. I will keep my contributions here to be "who was banned today"-related.

 

[T.Lex]

We have a number of posters, yourself included, who come here for no other reason but to post hot-button issues in the political forum and contribute next to nothing in any of the shooting/hunting/firearms sections that this website was born of. People in general cannot and will not behave themselves in the political forum and I would personally like to see it gone. INGO is a firearms website, not a political website. It has been my experience that the majority of the shenanigans on this forum and most of the complaints about this forum are born of the politics section. It's less than worthless on INGO and should be removed....but that's just MHO.

When they came for the General Politics forum, I did not speak out.
I don't like politics.
When they came for the Carry Issues forum, I did not speak out.
I don't carry how people carry.
When they came for the Great Outdoors forum, I did not speak out.
I don't live in the woods.

When they came for the Handguns and Long Guns forums, there was no one to speak for me.

Or something like that.

 

[bradmedic04]

Respectfully disagree being lumped into this category. I'm here as a firearms enthusiast first and foremost. I am quite active in the "Carry Issues" subforum. I'd ask that your personal disliking for the politics subforum (and possibly its members) be left out of discussion?

Would you consider relinquishing your moderation over that specific forum, given how negatively you view it? Honest question. You have a strong opinion against it... I don't know if that has anything to do with how you moderate it though. I certainly don't have an answer for that, or know what all goes behind the scenes... but this post is the first time I've seen how you feel about it.

It seems like more than one mod view moderating the political forum as an unpleasant duty, rather than a choice. Tough to blame anyone for that. I wouldn't want to do it.

 

[Gluemanz28]

 

[VUPDblue]

Relinquish moderating just that one forum? Absolutely not. I wouldn't dump more responsibility on the other MODs by refusing to moderate that section. Moderating the politics forum is like running a daycare and is also a large reason behind some of the INGO rules. There are a significant number of posters who chose to act like petulant children and do so only in the politics forum. It pisses me the **** off more than anyone can imagine why we have to have some of the ridiculous rules we have here, like no religious discussion. You know who ruined that facet of discussion? The petulant children in the political forum. We can't talk about race here. You know who ruined that? The petulant children in the politics forum. INGO is supposed to be a place for people of a common interest (firearms) to congregate and interact. We do not care what race, color, religion, blah blah blah blah etc... our members are and we do not condone making anyone feel unwelcome because of those things. We will not tolerate people attacking others or being uncivilized based on those aforementioned topics of discussion. That said, merely suggesting that folks not be *******s did not work, so the topics that were most often shown to produce petulant children acting like *******s were banned from discussion. Now that those topics are off the table, we get the petulant children who want to put their biggest, fattest toe right up against the line, and then act like the nuclear apocalypse has occurred when they get punished for stepping over it. If people on here would act like adults (what an amazing concept) we wouldn't have to have some of the rules we have. The bottom line is this; rules were made because folks could not or would not play nice. The section that is the most responsible for all that ass-hattery is the politics forum and I would nuke the whole damned thing TODAY if it were up to me.

 

[mbills2223]

Relinquish moderating just that one forum? Absolutely not. I wouldn't dump more responsibility on the other MODs by refusing to moderate that section. Moderating the politics forum is like running a daycare and is also a large reason behind some of the INGO rules. There are a significant number of posters who chose to act like petulant children and do so only in the politics forum. It pisses me the **** off more than anyone can imagine why we have to have some of the ridiculous rules we have here, like no religious discussion. You know who ruined that facet of discussion? The petulant children in the political forum. We can't talk about race here. You know who ruined that? The petulant children in the politics forum. INGO is supposed to be a place for people of a common interest (firearms) to congregate and interact. We do not care what race, color, religion, blah blah blah blah etc... our members are and we do not condone making anyone feel unwelcome because of those things. We will not tolerate people attacking others or being uncivilized based on those aforementioned topics of discussion. That said, merely suggesting that folks not be *******s did not work, so the topics that were most often shown to produce petulant children acting like *******s were banned from discussion. Now that those topics are off the table, we get the petulant children who want to put their biggest, fattest toe right up against the line, and then act like the nuclear apocalypse has occurred when they get punished for stepping over it. If people on here would act like adults (what an amazing concept) we wouldn't have to have some of the rules we have. The bottom line is this; rules were made because folks could not or would not play nice. The section that is the most responsible for all that ass-hattery is the politics forum and I would nuke the whole damned thing TODAY if it were up to me.

1) INGunOwners.com is viewed by thousands of people a day (not all of them gun owners or even gun friendly) As a public board we must make a good impression to those who view our community and represent Hoosier Gun Owners in the best possible light. INGO is a family friendly site and material posted must remain G-rated. Spamming, trolling, flaming or other personal attacks will not be tolerated.

2) Language that would be inappropriate in the polite company of strangers is unwelcome here. Posts which are indecipherable due to the inability to translate thoughts into coherent written statements will be deleted without explanation.

 

[churchmouse]

It seems like more than one mod view moderating the political forum as an unpleasant duty, rather than a choice. Tough to blame anyone for that. I wouldn't want to do it.

I would if.....

 

[Bill of Rights]

It seems like more than one mod view moderating the political forum as an unpleasant duty, rather than a choice. Tough to blame anyone for that. I wouldn't want to do it.

Moderating the political forum IS an unpleasant duty. That said, I do enjoy some discussions, I just hate having to clean up when some members decide to defecate all over a thread... or another member.... or themselves...

We had a member recently who decided to hop into a thread and crap on another member who had not posted there and had nothing to do with the thread. Several members called him on it, and I removed his posts, and theirs who referred to it. Apparently, there was some history between them based on another thread. Within 48 (and maybe 24) hrs, that member was banned by another mod for the same bloody thing that got his posts yanked off the board.

Kindergarteners know better than to "poke the bear" that way, but apparently, some members here do not.

As for VUPDBlue's post, since a member brought it to my attention, I'll say this:
I would not have phrased things the way he did. I don't fault him for it, it's his manner to be far more direct and less diplomatic than I am, just as I am less so than some other mods. We work well because we each address things differently, based on our own world-views. The member took issue with some members being called petulant children. Most of our members are not anywhere close to that description, but a few.... well, if the shoe fits, y'know?

I recently counseled another member privately, sans mod hat, and suggested that his posts might be better taken if he presented them differently. I would say the same to VUPD, but I'm pretty certain what we saw *was* the polite version. He's the only person who's been on the mod team longer than I have, consistently, and some things about this site wear on you after a while. I'd imagine that's true of most places on the net, and some places in the meat world, too. For those who might suggest that it is time for him to take a break, don't. If he needs one, he'll take it, but he's the one to judge that, not any of us. I'm very happy to have him around when it's time to get down to brass tacks. Hell, I'm glad to have him around at other times, too.

Gen Pol is... well, not a cesspool, exactly. It's kinda like ice cave diving. You don't really know what you're going to find under the ice, and you stand a good chance of not only getting immersed in it, but getting stuck down there with whatever it is, and sometimes, it's a b***h to find your own way back out. The rules here are meant to give people a rope that leads back to the hole in the ice, a way to not get into something too deeply. I'd much rather you followed the rope out, rather than make me get cold and wet and slimy coming in to fish you out of it. I can only imagine VUPDBlue (and the rest of the staff) feel likewise.

So... posting hot button issues, as he put it, yeah, that tends to go badly. It comes across like telling Polish jokes in Warsaw (Poland, not Indiana), or going to the Indiana Black Expo wearing a white sheet and a hood.

For those who do that, with a purpose in mind of stirring up crap.... please don't. That's not an invitation to jump to the opposite extreme and only post about guns and only about Indiana and never on anything else, and that much should be obvious.

Just because we are the moderator team does not mean that we're the only ones who can use moderation. Most of our members understand this and comply without much effort.

If you see yourself in VUPDBlue's post.... maybe you should ask yourself why.

For those about whom he was not talking, thank you.

Blessings (to all),
Bill

 

[Expat]

As for VUPDBlue's post, since a member brought it to my attention

Well, that is interesting...

 

[bwframe]

...
We had a member recently who decided to hop into a thread and crap on another member who had not posted there and had nothing to do with the thread. Several members called him on it, and I removed his posts, and theirs who referred to it. Apparently, there was some history between them based on another thread. Within 48 (and maybe 24) hrs, that member was banned by another mod for the same bloody thing that got his posts yanked off the board.

...l

Ah Ha! More puzzle pieces.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Many thanks to Bill of Rights, VUPDBlue and the rest of our fine staff for their dedicated work to keep this forum up and running well!

 

[mbills2223]

...I just hate having to clean up when some members decide to defecate all over a thread... or another member.... or themselves...

New sig line...???

 

[churchmouse]

Well, that is interesting...

There are a lot of "Eyeballs" in here.

 

[bradmedic04]

There are a lot of "Eyeballs" in here.

 

[churchmouse]

Ah hell no.....

 

[1911ly]

This person has some strange post. I suspect it's a spammer or something else that might not end well.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...-threatening-neighbor-story-self-defense.html

 

[SkullDaddy.45]

This person has some strange post. I suspect it's a spammer or something else that might not end well.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...-threatening-neighbor-story-self-defense.html

Our new buddy CEO Rusty has my vote. Won't last till dinner time.

 

[1911ly]

Would it be ethical to hold a lottery? If so I call 4:30

 

[VUPDblue]

Y'all shoulda bet the under....

 

[1911ly]

Y'all shoulda bet the under....

I call fowl! You got inside information!!!!!

 

[mom45]

Would it be ethical to hold a lottery? If so I call 4:30

I tried to post in that thread, and I apparently am not allowed to. Is it in a super secret part of the forum? I had to go back and make sure I hadn't been given shooter status or something...glad to see I had not.