Is this a hunting website or a political site??

[bubba]

Or just bypass it and keep going

[Caveman]

I don't even mean stopping at political posts.  Provided it's actually possible, why not allow users to select what forums and sub-forums they want to see new posts from?

 

What would be so bad about people being able to customize their experience on the forum, Bubba? 

[jrm]

Almost every thread in this forum turns into a few members bashing each other.  And typically it goes beyond just a friendly debate, it gets downright nasty.  Of course, political discussions tend to invite this type of atmosphere, but it's not confined to politics. 

 

You are 100% correct, but I don't believe that politics should even be mentioned in the same context.

 

I have a variety of interests and read a lot of message boards. Been doing so since well before forums like this existed (is was called USENET and was the precursor of web forums).

 

Doesn't matter what the topic is. People will argue it. Mac vs PC, Ford vs. Chevy, the "right" was to do [insert any activity here]. 

 

The anonymity of the internet is what makes it worse. Many seemed more inclined to talk trash when they can hide behind a handle and don't have to deal face to face. Even if not "hiding" it does seem much easier to be rude when you don't have to look someone in the face to do it.

 

I have quit several forums over the years because the site degraded into third-grade playground behavior. I was active on a forum a few years ago where a certain topic became the subject of intense debate. One "side" actually planned a strategy in a separate forum to bring in "ringers" - they coordinated posts and "verbally" attacked people who were on the other side of their issue. It was _ugly_. I remember reading PMs from new forum members who were afraid to ask a question because they might get ripped apart.

 

To play in the internet playground you need a thick skin. That still doesn't excuse rude behavior or personal attacks. Negativity can grow and become the death of a good forum.

 

There is some BS that happens here (and at least some of it would be easy to stop), but it is still very tame compared to much of what I have seen elsewhere. 

[Mr VJP]

I have to agree with you guys.  Many on here are just childish bullies.  If they don't like a post, a person's past posts, his general life philosophy or his politics, they won't argue the facts of the post, they will attack the OP personally.  That is not what is called civilized debate.  

 

Some members think they elevate their status on the site by attacking others and looking to see how many will side with them.  It's a gang mentality.  The Politics section is just the place where this happens most.  IMO, that is what moderators are supposed to control.

 

Anyway, it matters not to me what is decided about the recent posts feed.  If I think I should post something I believe is important for the outdoor crowd to know, I'll post it.  I just have to get better at ignoring the rude comments from those who cannot debate the post from an intellectual standpoint.  It's too tempting and easy to stoop to their level with a reply.

 

 

 

[Doc]

In the words of that famous American Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along?" The fact is that we have trolls wandering through the political forum in particular, constantly posting threads because they know full well that it will tread on the core values of other members and will start controversy in a personal way. It is not merely posting opinions, but it is "baiting" in the very best style of internet trolling. And those who complain loudest about civility and "getting along" are or have been the very worst offenders at one time or another. And now they stand here with a feigned deep sense of offense, pouting because they have reaped a bit of what they have sown.

 

Also, I think it is the height of naiveté to think that incendiary issues that are engrained in hunting will not occasionally cause tempers to flair. And by the way, anyone standing there pretending that they have never engaged in that sort of thing themselves is being a bit disingenuous. Hunters are a passionate bunch of people with deeply engrained traditions and heritage, which doesn't always align well with each other. Most are not the sort of people that will back down when challenged. Anytime you have those conditions and then throw in a few trolls, you can expect the obvious to happen. And while a political forum is a natural for that kind of thing, it kind of stands to reason that when you poke at people's core beliefs, you might occasionally get bit, politics or otherwise. That is really quite natural and we all really know it despite how much we pretend to be bothered by it. But please do not stand here an feign victimization. It really is unbecoming, and nobody is really buying it.

[Doc]

You know, we don't have a forum on religion, knitting, or flower propagation, so we do kind of try to keep things on theme here which is hunting fishing, trapping, and all things outdoors. Is that such an unusual thing for forums to insist that content have some general theme? Do people come here looking for political guidance in order to establish some kind of political ideology or party affiliation? Should they? Seriously ..... should they? I mean, really, I had a knee-jerk reaction when I first heard people complaining about what the political forum has become. But sitting back and thinking about it all, I guess I have to agree that forums are seldom opened up to every topic in the world and commonly they have some sort of core theme to their discussion content. And yes there are political aspects to outdoor issues. But even I have a hard time seeing the outdoor aspects  to most of the recent posts on our style and quality of government. Those kinds of discussions are certainly legitimate topics for discussion someplace, but definitely not in a site that specializes in outdoor activities and issues. So maybe we do have an issue.

[growalot]

It's just too obvious...

 

Point made

[erussell]

Or just bypass it and keep going

 

 

Yeah what he said. This is a free country you are allowed to say what you like and read what you like. If you dont like it then dont read it. No one makes you read it. Get sick of people who try to censor things just because it doesnt agree with there views. No one is ever going to tell me what I can and cannot say and I let them know it right up front when they try to stop me.

[First-light]

Yeah what he said. This is a free country you are allowed to say what you like and read what you like. If you dont like it then dont read it. No one makes you read it. Get sick of people who try to censor things just because it doesnt agree with there views. No one is ever going to tell me what I can and cannot say and I let them know it right up front when they try to stop me.

There is no censoring going on, just want it moved out of most popular or give us the option to ignore. I come to the site and look at most popular, if most of its politics I'm gone. 

Simple as that, maybe at season I'll go into the harvest threads.

[SteveB]

That's about the sum of it. There is a cadre of about 5 people, who, as soon as I see their name in a thread, can all but bet that the post is in some way negative or ridiculing or contrarian. 

 

You, an ex NYer - and who are the other 3?

[Mr VJP]

There's one of those non civil debate, low intellect posts right there.  Just an insult, that actually makes Papist's point perfectly.  And we aren't even in the political forum.

 

[letinmfly]

I stay away from political posts because there are way too many opinions on the issues.  Yes everyone is entitled to their opinion and I have no problem with political posts...except for the way some of you attack and insult each other.  Those kind of posts do nothing to resolve the issues nor promote the site.

[Caveman]

Yeah what he said. This is a free country you are allowed to say what you like and read what you like. If you dont like it then dont read it. No one makes you read it. Get sick of people who try to censor things just because it doesnt agree with there views. No one is ever going to tell me what I can and cannot say and I let them know it right up front when they try to stop me.

 

Censorship would be telling you that you can't post your opinions.  What people are suggesting is a way to opt out of having threads that don't interest them filling up the recent posts list.  Two very different things.  

[phade]

You know, we don't have a forum on religion, knitting, or flower propagation, so we do kind of try to keep things on theme here which is hunting fishing, trapping, and all things outdoors. Is that such an unusual thing for forums to insist that content have some general theme? Do people come here looking for political guidance in order to establish some kind of political ideology or party affiliation? Should they? Seriously ..... should they? I mean, really, I had a knee-jerk reaction when I first heard people complaining about what the political forum has become. But sitting back and thinking about it all, I guess I have to agree that forums are seldom opened up to every topic in the world and commonly they have some sort of core theme to their discussion content. And yes there are political aspects to outdoor issues. But even I have a hard time seeing the outdoor aspects  to most of the recent posts on our style and quality of government. Those kinds of discussions are certainly legitimate topics for discussion someplace, but definitely not in a site that specializes in outdoor activities and issues. So maybe we do have an issue.

 

Yes, this site does.

[bubba]

Conformity of all to satisfy a few

[Doc]

One thing comes to mind as I read this thread. It seems to me that there are a lot of people who cannot control their urges to enter a forum that pisses them off. Why is that? Is it like a car wreck.... you really don't want to see anything gory but you just can't make yourself not look .....lol. There are a few forums here that I have absolutely no interest in and by golly, I don't go into them. It really seems so simple.

 

Also I don't rely on the 5 latest items to indicate what I will read, because I know darned well that I am going to miss more topics than I catch. Apparently we are looking for automated and mechanized systems to pick the topics for us. I guess I don't really have a lot of interest in that. I go to the forums that interest me and actually see all of what's new. If I don't have time for that, then I probably don't have time for the site.

[phade]

Conformity of all to satisfy a few

Giving people more options is not conformity. Not one bit.

[phade]

One thing comes to mind as I read this thread. It seems to me that there are a lot of people who cannot control their urges to enter a forum that pisses them off. Why is that? Is it like a car wreck.... you really don't want to see anything gory but you just can't make yourself not look .....lol. There are a few forums here that I have absolutely no interest in and by golly, I don't go into them. It really seems so simple.

Also I don't rely on the 5 latest items to indicate what I will read, because I know darned well that I am going to miss more topics than I catch. Apparently we are looking for automated and mechanized systems to pick the topics for us. I guess I don't really have a lot of interest in that. I go to the forums that interest me and actually see all of what's new. If I don't have time for that, then I probably don't have time for the site.

Many people use recent/hot topics. Its very popular. You can see the ten most recently started or replied to threads. It can be similar to new content but is leaner. Admittedly, this is used when people are at work, in a tree, etc when people have 5 or 10 minutes to spare. Navigating through 40 subforums is time consuming. You and many others seem to keep stating 5 threads on the recent topics list. You can expand that to ten, so you can customize the number. Adding the ability to further customize is such a minor improvement that would help increase UI for many people while at the same time not hurting anyone. The yahoos screaming the sky is falling wouldnt even know or be impacted by another persons private choice, which appears to be ironic.

People keep going back to why people click on links if they dont interest them. Thats the thing, they dont interest some and they dont click on them. They still bog down the recent topics list. You can customize alot of features on this site but not on that list. It makes zero sense from a UI perspective. It has nothing to do with clicking on links thst have no interest. Political threads often have large post count, which is why they often sit atop the recent topics list. Being able to skim out subforums has nothing to do with not clicking on links.

Having the ability to customize that list would increase the UI quality. Many forums offer this. I dont see the big deal in why this is an issue for any forum looking to make the best experience possible for its member base. Can you answer that?

31 people took that poll. 17 didnt want political threads and 14 did. Customizing the recent topics list to improve the UI doesnt impede the 14 at all and gives the 17 an increased experience. I see no way how it is censorship, limiting right, big government, conformity or any other batwing nutjob crazy accusations being poo flung by certain people about those who dont want political threads about choppers flying over borders or homeland security conspiracies clogging up their main navigating site to a HUNTING forum that limits the amount of HUNTING threads to populate on that list.

Seems pretty reasonable. But I digress.

Edited July 16, 2014 by phade

[fasteddie]

This thread keeps staying in the Most Recent Topics ..............

[phade]

This thread keeps staying in the Most Recent Topics ..............

Good. How does it taste?

Instead of just being a smart alec, why dont you try to explain why a custom recent.topics list cant be made? All I see is more poo flinging by your crowd.

Edited July 16, 2014 by phade

[bubba]

Man you like to whine

[phade]

Man you like to whine

And you cant make a logical response. Feel better?

[bubba]

So by the vote 4 people want it changed. In the first place that is very few people who even participated so not as big of an issue as you are making it. To ask the owner to change the set up for four people is ludicrous. If I were the owner I would not even respond. IH wait he hasnt

[bubba]

Logical enough

[phade]

So by the vote 4 people want it changed. In the first place that is very few people who even participated so not as big of an issue as you are making it. To ask the owner to change the set up for four people is ludicrous. If I were the owner I would not even respond. IH wait he hasnt

Why are you saying 4? This isnt a populous vote to deterime decision, its to see how many would use such a feature. See the difference? More people would want the feature than dont. And it doesnt affect you, who doesnt. Why do you want to limit personal freedom bubba? Are you a democrat/obama lover? You must be in Cuomos camp. In all seriousness.I know you are not, but you are lobbing out statements that just dont align with what is being asked. Edited July 16, 2014 by phade