What is the general consensus on what we are allowed to discuss?

[PhL0aTeR]

in the past 2 days ive had one thread locked and then one totally deleted or moved, so what does the general membership think is allow for discussion? Then maybe a moderator will step in and squash all those ideas and give us a list of what we ARENT allowed to talk about :scared:

[WillysWagon]

We don’t want a thread to turn into a finger pointing match of who’s innocent or guilty. If the parties involved ‘want’ to talk about what happened, they will. When ‘Legal Action’ is involved, it’s better to go off facts versus speculation. Bottom line is, the ‘site owner’ decides what is acceptable to talk about, not the Mods.

[shrapmetal]

as much as i would like to talk about this my attorney has instructed me not to. thank you guys for not allowing it to get out of control on here like it has in the local media. when my attorney tells me it is ok i will gladly fill all of you in

[PhL0aTeR]

That still doesnt answer my question.... where is the line? I guess the site owner draws the line, but for what reason does he draw it? When the article concerns a member when its negative? Its in the media, i dont understand why its censored just because one of the parties involved is a member here. I just want to be hip to the unwritten rules so i dont waste my time posting what i thought was on topic material. And when i say moderator, thats a generic term for anyone with any power to modify anything other than their own posts on this site.


as much as i would like to talk about this my attorney has instructed me not to. thank you guys for not allowing it to get out of control on here like it has in the local media. when my attorney tells me it is ok i will gladly fill all of you in

and i respect that, and really had no intentions of finger pointing or anything like that, just thought it was relevant info since this is a firearms site... just not sure why we can talk about a multitude of other things relating to the same thing, but when its about a member here, its hush hush....

[TheSparkens]

+ 1 This is true. I have heard in the past we are all big boys and girls here, so if some one gets out of hand with a post, stop that, but don't censor something that is already out. I do understand the distrust in the press but come on can't we decide what we wish to believe or not. I have rarely seen a thread on here were someone has been able to bash someone else and get away with it, it has, in my opinion, been very fare and balanced with adult conversations and no punks running their mouths.
Thank you to the people who run this site.

[Hoser]

and i respect that, and really had no intentions of finger pointing or anything like that, just thought it was relevant info since this is a firearms site... just not sure why we can talk about a multitude of other things relating to the same thing, but when its about a member here, its hush hush....

*You* might be respectful of that and most everyone here would also be. However until a time when Shawn is able/willing to share all the details, it is none of our business to speculate anything about the case.

Your first thread about this was locked. You posted the article and it is still there. You were not censored. I am pretty sure I posted a note about not posting any more on the subject.

Obviously you dont see my point. Please contact the site owner.

[PhL0aTeR]

*You* might be respectful of that and most everyone here would also be. However until a time when Shawn is able/willing to share all the details, it is none of our business to speculate anything about the case.

Your first thread about this was locked. You posted the article and it is still there. You were not censored. I am pretty sure I posted a note about not posting any more on the subject.

Obviously you dont see my point. Please contact the site owner.

technically this has nothing to do with that article, although my question was spurred because of it, notice i DID refrain from posting anything more about it, but since everyone here knows what spurred my question, they brought it up.

And i was censored, because i had a thread deleted.

I just want to know the rules so i dont waste my time posting.

Who is the site owner?

[7idl]

Roger, aka BBAdmin is the Boss in these here parts

http://www.co-ar15.com/forums/member.php?u=2

[Gman]

I can understand both sides. I am glad to know that something is being investigated. It also made me think about how the .gov can treat anyone going to or hosting a semi-auto AK "build party". I also understand that everyone is innocent until proven guilty. I can also respect Shawn's right to privacy and keeping this from being a trial of public opinion.

I can't opine about a deleted thread because I know nothing about it. I also wouldn't want to seem like I was second-guessing the Mods. Seems to me like something that would be better suited to an off-line conversation.

[eerw]

as much as i would like to talk about this my attorney has instructed me not to. thank you guys for not allowing it to get out of control on here like it has in the local media. when my attorney tells me it is ok i will gladly fill all of you in

Hey Shawn..
all the best..

[BadShot]

The reality is that this and pretty much all gun forums are heavily monitored by state and federal LE. Don't mistake that, hence when we have a situation where a member is under investigation or charged, it's flat out smarter to handle this the way they have been handled before. Kill speculation and stop discussions that are far better kept in private and off the fricken internet.

Roger pays for all of this and he and the chosen moderators have a fairly liberal policy, but when they do chose to nip something, I've found they are pretty damn good about letting you know why.

While I understand your reason for asking, perhaps you'd have gotten a better response about the deleted thread by asking the mods via IM.

Generally speaking, common sense and typically civil discussion and topics are good to go. Meaning if you wouldn't talk to your kids about it, or your parents, most likely it isn't something that needs to be thrown up on the internet.

[bjl913]

The reality is that this and pretty much all gun forums are heavily monitored by state and federal LE. Don't mistake that, hence when we have a situation where a member is under investigation or charged, it's flat out smarter to handle this the way they have been handled before. Kill speculation and stop discussions that are far better kept in private and off the fricken internet.

Roger pays for all of this and he and the chosen moderators have a fairly liberal policy, but when they do chose to nip something, I've found they are pretty damn good about letting you know why.

While I understand your reason for asking, perhaps you'd have gotten a better response about the deleted thread by asking the mods via IM.

Generally speaking, common sense and typically civil discussion and topics are good to go. Meaning if you wouldn't talk to your kids about it, or your parents, most likely it isn't something that needs to be thrown up on the internet.


Amen Brotha! coudnt have said it better myself!

[PhL0aTeR]

so is the reason JUST because an affected party is a member here?

[HunterCO]

so is the reason JUST because an affected party is a member here?

The reason is we don't want a bunch of speculation the fact is we have no facts in any way shape or form. The media is not facts and that is the only thing anybody has to go off of.

If somebody posted the police reports of the entire investigation I would have no problem with it. The fact is the only thing anybody is posting is what the media says which means nothing.

PhL0aTer I can tell you this much we=(site staff) would extened the same courtesy too you if you ever found your self in Shawns position. I am going to guess you have never been in the system am I right? Let me tell you I have and what the media usually reports is the farthest thing from the truth. It's about 5% truth and 95% miss information.

I am sure Shawn would love to tell everyone of us what happened but he cant at this point. Lets give him that chance before we pass judgement especially based on the media.

[PhL0aTeR]

The reason is we don't want a bunch of speculation the fact is we have no facts in any way shape or form. The media is not facts and that is the only thing anybody has to go off of.

So if i posted a "like article" about a guy in florida that had no connection with this site, it too, would be locked?


If somebody posted the police reports of the entire investigation I would have no problem with it. The fact is the only thing anybody is posting is what the media says which means nothing.

PhL0aTer I can tell you this much we=(site staff) would extened the same courtesy too you if you ever found your self in Shawns position. I am going to guess you have never been in the system am I right?

Actually, i have been in for several years, the ATF/FBI visited my house and conducted a search of the many firearms i had at the time. but thats beside the point.


Let me tell you I have and what the media usually reports is the farthest thing from the truth. It's about 5% truth and 95% miss information.

I am sure Shawn would love to tell everyone of us what happened but he cant at this point. Lets give him that chance before we pass judgement especially based on the media.

I hate to make it look like im missing the point, but i think i must not be wording my questions properly, but you, in a round about way have answered it, that it is because the party involved is a member because you said you would extend the same courtesy to me... I just would like to know the line so i dont cross it next time and end up on the asshole list.... lol

[HunterCO]

I hate to make it look like im missing the point, but i think i must not be wording my questions properly, but you, in a round about way have answered it, that it is because the party involved is a member because you said you would extend the same courtesy to me... I just would like to know the line so i dont cross it next time and end up on the asshole list.... lol

We don't have any list and you did not cross any line. This is the problem you judged a man even though you have no facts. This is a direct quote from you and that is the problem. You based your opinion of him on a news paper article.


Why is it when some one is on the bad side of the law' we are not allowed to discuss it?

Exactly how did you come to the conclusion he is on the bad side of the law??

[PhL0aTeR]

We don't have any list and you did not cross any line. This is the problem you judged a man even though you have no facts. This is a direct quote from you and that is the problem. You based your opinion of him on a news paper article.



Exactly how did you come to the conclusion he is on the bad side of the law??

I was told by another moderator that there was a line i crossed, and thats why my thread got locked, and thats why another got deleted. I didnt judge anyone, from what i know about him, he is a good guy and i follow some of his post on another forum as well.

But i based my statement (Not judgement) on the fact that he has already "lawyered up" which is a direct quote from another member. Perhaps that was a bad choice of words, but for lack of a better phrase, thats what i used. But to define why i said it, if he needs to get a lawyer, he cant very well be on the good side of the law can he?

I think that minuscule quote was misconstrued into me saying he was guilty even though when i posted the original article i added my own word in the title (alleged), but i digress....

All in all i hope it works out for him, but thats not what this thread was supposed to be about, I just wanted to better learn of the grey area, but it appears that ill just fly by the seat of my pants cuz the area is still grey. End of story ;)

[BadShot]

Actually I do think there is validity to raising the issue. I don't pay a ton of attention to local media because of the lack of real value. But bringing the fact to the community here, that one of our own is being investigated, right wrong or indifferent, is valuable.

Where the line gets crossed in this group is when the discussion expands beyond the facts. The fact is that there are always several sides to these kinds of stories. We watched some inappropriate discussion regarding another member occur and while it was quashed in a timely manner, the fact is that the discussion could have added prejudice had the wrong comments been made.

To the more specific question.. what topics are inappropriate for www.co-ar15.com/forums ... aka, this community.. well that is partly up to the club President/site owner; aka Roger .. and those with whom he has entrusted the day to day management of the site and club.. e.g. moderators.

They do on average, a far better job of moderating the forum that most places. Even the more obscure sites that I've been known to haunt.

Now, one option is to look at what I personally consider the gold standard for firearm entrenched web sites/communities... LightFighter... never a more crass and brutal crowd has the internet known, but also one of the highest standards of integrity, honesty and a absolute zero tolerance for bull shiddi-da .. I highly recommend to everyone, take some time, read what gets posted there.

I might even recommend that given the nature of some of these issues in the last year.. members with legal run in's.. news items, ect .. that we have a "current events" or "news and issues" forum created to facilitate the communication of these types of items. I would also suggest that it be governed in the same manner as LightFighters "Crusaders Hall" or "Intel" forums.

Again, I think I answered your question fairly succinctly with regards to what is and what isn't considered generally acceptable on co-ar15... the post is there to re-read and if you really think I missed the mark, I'll be happy to rephrase the response or attempt to better expand upon the premise, though I don't think it's lost on you.

[TheSparkens]

[quote=BadShot;89453]


I might even recommend that given the nature of some of these issues in the last year.. members with legal run in's.. news items, ect .. that we have a "current events" or "news and issues" forum created to facilitate the communication of these types of items. I would also suggest that it be governed in the same manner as LightFighters "Crusaders Hall" or "Intel" forums.

This would be a good idea.

[Roger]

I have not been avoiding this, I was just trying to figure out how to respond to it. No matter what I do I'm bound to offend someone. And all I can do is to try to be fair and consistent.

When I founded this place several years ago, I envisioned a fun place to post information, and get together with other people who enjoyed shooting. I never in my wildest dreams thought that someday I would become a person who had to deal with members being arrested, or members going to prison, or similar issues. So up until the end of last year this was not something that I was prepared to deal with.

Traditionally we have not had an official "COC" or any written rules about what can and can not be posted here. I would hate to have to create one. Nobody gets paid for running this site, and there are no real benefits to being a mod or manager here other then the joys of working hard to support something you like and or believe in.

I always believe in erring on the side of caution. I can tell you for a fact that this site is monitored, and law enforcement is on this site weekly if not daily. I also know for a fact that there are some anti-gun types out there that have, and probably do, troll this site for whatever they can find. They, like the media believe in guilt by association. Lets not give them any more ammunition then they already have.

I have talked to the mods here and I believe that the actions they took were appropriate. The actions they took were taken to protect those that are under scrutiny. There is nothing written down, they just have to use their best judgment and do the best they can.

So you may post whatever you want. But if a mod feels it is inappropriate he may lock the thread or trash it. I trust their judgment or they wouldn't be here. And in all honesty, we don't lock many threads, and I can only think of one or two real people that we have banned here. We do let most things go by. So we will all continue to do the best we can. And we will try to be fair and consistent. That's all we can do.

And finally, if you feel that a lock was unfair, contact whoever locked it and discuss it with them. Politely please. If you're still not satisfied come to me and I'll look into it.

Thanks.

[StagLefty]

Well done Roger !! [Beer]