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..