Feedback How do you want us to moderate?

[ikeo1]

I wish you good luck on keeping politics out of a firearms forum based in California for California firearm owners and those that may have interests in sport/self defense.

I do not mean anything negative. As I mentioned in an earlier post, it did not bode well for another firearms site a few years back. Forums not so intertwined with ever changing laws and regulations that can get one into some serious trouble may very well succeed being political free.

We're not trying to keep out 2A politics here locally. Just the passive aggressive talk that isn't very helpful or useful. When you blame a party, when this group in particular is very mixed. So we only want relevant 2A politics vs. general statements. If there's a bill to discuss, where we can leverage the board to write to a politician. That's ok.

If people want to complain for the sake of complaining and rant, then this is not the place. There's plenty of places on the internet for that.

Here, we want to get you on the range. Volunteer at your club, take a class, learn to reload, see what we can do collectively, that sort of thing. Help you find your first firearm, safety class, and whatever else to make a better citizen.

 

[Kyle1886]

We're not trying to keep out 2A politics here locally. Just the passive aggressive talk that isn't very helpful or useful. When you blame a party, when this group in particular is very mixed. So we only want relevant 2A politics vs. general statements. If there's a bill to discuss, where we can leverage the board to write to a politician. That's ok.

If people want to complain for the sake of complaining and rant, then this is not the place. There's plenty of places on the internet for that.

Here, we want to get you on the range. Volunteer at your club, take a class, learn to reload, see what we can do collectively, that sort of thing. Help you find your first firearm, safety class, and whatever else to make a better citizen.

Understood, thank you for the reply.

Respectfully
Kyle

 

[DrJonesUSA]

I have a few thoughts on the topic.
First is most places online definitely heavily over-moderate. IDK about others, but myself personally, I'm in the unConstitutional position of having second thoughts before posting my opinions most places. I'm rarely foul / vulgar; it's just the pathetic state of our clown world that facts & the truth hurts SO many peoples little feewwwings..... it's pathetic, disgusting, despicable.

At the same time, rules are required for structure & any organization of any kind to flourish & succeed.

I'd definitely err towards LESS moderation than more. Blatant name calling & insulting is unacceptable, but at the same time, debates can get heated. So long as they don't devolve.

I shouldn't have to come here & worry about using adult language, for example.

I just want to get to and speak the truth & facts and IDC if that hurts your delicate sensibilities.

 

[DrJonesUSA]

I believe @DrJonesUSA is the only person he's actually responded to. I was nosy and asked but I'll respect his privacy.

I can't speak obviously to who else Kestryll may have responded to, but yes; he & I have been in contact.

 

[DrJonesUSA]

This is EXACTLY how I treat this board. There's a lot of stereotypes that people have when it comes to people who own guns. What I liked about r/CAguns on reddit was its very newbie friendly with a lot of helpful people. The aesthetic and function of the site leads to this. Which is why we're trying to add events, classes, and product reviews to compliment the marketplace.

This is also why I think Calguns itself is a necessary part of the equation to keep OT going because you cannot stop banter. This site is something more of a refined site, say like sigtalk or snipershide. A lot of people fear guns. Personally I've been able to calm people down when they understand why its good for some people to own, especially if they are competent with their firearm. So my vision is a site that's information based with an educational vibe.

This begs the question. If Calguns doesn't help itself. Should I just help him? The problem is i would need to move it to my infrastructure in order to scale and theres a lot of work but totally doable if I could have a conversation.


We're pretty open about this and we'll DM but the editing is mainly just to get rid of the unnecessary direct taunts or delete the post. This is why we're asking. It's our observation offensive get offended when its directed to them but shouldn't be when they offend others, the receiver should somehow tolerate it.

As far as OT, we don't really have a section here for that. Because when we first started the site the Redditors told us how bad OT got, so we decided not to include it but we do let some things go when it comes to wellness. As long as its not Religion or Politicking and we can maintain the temperature and vibe. We all like our pewpews, no reason to throw in something that we as individuals feel strongly about. Here our commonalities should be the primary focus. So i don't have a direct answer.

My 2 cents:

- I've long ago noticed how fragmented the gun community is. I know you guys know all the cliches & quotes, but it really is so true; United We Stand and Divided We Fall.
I hate the technical issues that calguns has been having, and I hate that it's gotten so bad & taken so long, that someone created yet another forum. NOT judging; just a sucky situation.

That said; I think ultimately we should try to combine forces / forums one way or another. I'm not choosing sides, I'm not saying any one is better than the other or anything like that; simply stating my view that more forums is not better.

All it will do is further fragment the gun community. As it was, it was great to go to gun shows & various places and see CalGuns tables & business cards; materials directing people to the forums, etc.

We lose that by having multiple forums.
I have no clue how many users CalGuns has, nor how long it took them to get there, but it can't be insignificant time nor effort.

Again; zero judgement; just saying that I think we should stick together in one spot as much as possible, whether that's CAGuns or CaLGuns, IDK......

And also; an OT forum is a MUST. Generally, Gun people are relatively like-minded. We're normal. We're good. We're decent.
Doesn't matter race, sex, gay / straight, any of that crap; we love guns, and generally, we agree on lots of other things too.
I value & respect like 99%++ of the gun community, which means I want to be able to discuss other stuff, like TRT, maybe some LIGHT AND RESPECTFUL politics, etc.
I want to be able to ask & answer questions about different topics beyond guns.

Personally, i spent more time in OT at CalGuns than anywhere else.
And holy was it a lifesaver during the pLandemic too...!!!
I vote we must have some sort of OT forum(s).

 

[fifer55]

My 2 cents:

- I've long ago noticed how fragmented the gun community is. I know you guys know all the cliches & quotes, but it really is so true; United We Stand and Divided We Fall.
I hate the technical issues that calguns has been having, and I hate that it's gotten so bad & taken so long, that someone created yet another forum. NOT judging; just a sucky situation.

That said; I think ultimately we should try to combine forces / forums one way or another. I'm not choosing sides, I'm not saying any one is better than the other or anything like that; simply stating my view that more forums is not better.

All it will do is further fragment the gun community. As it was, it was great to go to gun shows & various places and see CalGuns tables & business cards; materials directing people to the forums, etc.

We lose that by having multiple forums.
I have no clue how many users CalGuns has, nor how long it took them to get there, but it can't be insignificant time nor effort.

Again; zero judgement; just saying that I think we should stick together in one spot as much as possible, whether that's CAGuns or CaLGuns, IDK......

Absolutely, but hard to combine efforts when one party comes to the table and the other party ignores the invitation to the table.

Not judging, but if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

 

[Kyle1886]

I could be in error, but I think Mr. Ikeo1, for the present wants to keep Caguns mainly a forum to buy/sell/trade and for the time being all else is secondary until the unknown results of Calguns and it's issues. Basic info on some subject matter relating to firearms of course is inclusive.

Caguns is young enough it can be a bit flexible.

I admit, I'm a Calgunner, cannot deny that, one, because of its versatility and some of the actual real people I met there in person. Some I never actually met but communicated with fairly regularly, one of which recently passed. Kinda like family for me.

Hopefully we can work together for the "common cause" now and in the future.

Respectfully
Kyle

 

[ikeo1]

I could be in error, but I think Mr. Ikeo1, for the present wants to keep Caguns mainly a forum to buy/sell/trade and for the time being all else is secondary until the unknown results of Calguns and it's issues. Basic info on some subject matter relating to firearms of course is inclusive.

You’re very observant. I can fix CGN if given the chance

 

[Joker67]

There were / are a lot of turbo posters on Calguns who admit they hardly shoot and they

You’re very observant. I can fix CGN if given the chance

or for people who like to shoot and train. There are a lot of turbo posters on CG who openly state they hardly shoot and never train/ attend classes/ compete.

 

[treelogger]

Before I can even think about "how do I want the owners and staff to moderate", I need to know something else: what do those owners and staff see as the purpose of the forum? Because ultimately, that determines who they want to participate here, and what content they want to be posted.

• Do they want to make good money with the forum? With careful optimization, my educated guess is that the forum might be good for a low 6-digit amount, with relatively little work over the long-term average (probably hours per week). One particular variation of making money with the forum itself is to use the forum as a platform for other friendly organizations (for example FPC or CRPA) to raise funds.
• Do they want adulation and being treated like a god, or have an area where they can exercise total power? I've seen that on quite a few discussion forums, not only in the 2A space, and not only in the US or the English language. I think a great example of a control freak was Mike Packwood at the Sig Forum (I don't know whether he still owns it, not even whether it is still in operation). For quite a while he was treated as god and all-knowing about Sig pistols, and any technical opinion that differed from his dogma caused immediate ban and deletion.
• Do they want the forum to push a particular world view, be it a political direction or a religion? We all know about 2A forums where any criticism of Christianity, the Republican Party, or Donald Trump amounts to a death sentence or worse; that's the common (but not only) belief system in the 2A sphere.
• Is the point of the forum to organize political activism, for example to gain ground on gun rights? Somewhere around the 2005 to 2010 or 2012 timeframe, the Calguns forum actually attempted to fill that niche, with a lot of organizing of lawsuits, regulatory complaints, and political lobbying. It was also used to figure out and then popularize OLLs and refinements such as SRBs, bullet buttons, and U2/Thordsen stocks, and SSE and single-action exemptions. As the contentious split between Calguns forum and foundation (and later FPC) shows, organizing legal and political work in the public eye, in a world filled with egomaniacs and crazies, is difficult.
• Or is the purpose of the forum just to create a place where people can buy and sell guns and related stuff, with enough advertising to pay the bills, and perhaps compensate the folks doing the software work for their hours?
• Expanding on that idea, maybe they also need a place discuss completely apolitical and unemotional questions about guns? Such as what the best way to clean a barrel, how to sight in a 10/22 scope, whether one needs to use Eley Match ammo when plinking at empty cans, whether 9mm or 45 is a better man stopper (or woman or other gender stopper), whether pistol, AR-style rifle or shotgun is more appropriate for home defense? As you see, I showed that in reality, there are few gun-related questions that are not fraught with emotion and political overtones.
• How about helping folks understand the legal environment? Typical questions are "am I allowed to do X with my gun in situation Y?". Unfortunately, typical answers are all over the place. I'm sure that gentle and knowledgeable folks like Librarian can give us a quick summary of the relevant law, but how do you deal with the chorus of voices such as concealed is concealed, that law is unconstitutional anyway, better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6, am I being detained, never answer any questions of a cop, I am traveling not driving, and all the stuff that is between 50% and 90% of the answers to such questions on typical gun forums?
• And the logical next step is discussion of the political environment that is shaping the legal environment? For example, will Senator Portantino ban all calibers except those that are a prime number of mm? Sadly, that would get rid of both 9mm and 10mm handguns. No he can't do that, because in inches those are prime number. No you libtard, .357 is not an integer, it is a real number, therefore it can't be prime. A demonrat such as Portantino won't know the difference between integer and real. Saint Benitez once took a class in differential geometry, he'll fix it. It's all Soros fault, he's related to Eotvos (both are Hungarians!) and will change mathematics so that my favorite caliber is no longer prime. You see what I did here? The typical discussion of politics on gun forums is mostly devoid of knowledge, in particular knowledge of law and politics, and nearly always devolves into name calling and insults.
• A lot of people in the gun world pride themselves on being "simple farmers, people of the land, the common clay of the new west". There is a mythos of populism and earthiness among ourselves. If one were to moderate to get rid of people calling each other wads and F-heads, or of using words such as libtard, Drumpf and demonrat to emphasize their points, what fraction of all users would run away in disgust? By the way, the continuation of the above "simple farmers..." quote is "... you know, morons". Where I'm going with this question is: Trying to moderate to get people to use civil language and not insults is again going to drive a lot of folks away.
• The gun world is dominated by certain groups. First and foremost males, but also republicans, whites, and Christians. One effect we see is that the discussion and manners are permeated by exclusionary tropes. Great example: one California gun forum where a large fraction of all users' avatars are animated GIFs of women with large and wobbling breasts. The political swear words I used above as examples are another case study of the same effect, as is the constant race baiting over questions such as "illegal immigrants voting will destroy gun rights" commonly found on gun forums. Does anyone expect female, non-white or users to enjoy a forum where that is the style? Case in point: If you read along in places like the Liberal Gun Club Forum or the r/liberalgunowners reddit, you'll regularly find female gun owners saying that "we can actually post here without getting yelled at or leg humped". Similarly, there are plenty of straight but female or non-white folks who show up at Pink Pistol shoots, simple because they find the environment more welcoming and less exclusionary. For a forum, is it a net gain or a net loss to moderate discussions to make them welcoming to these non-traditional gun owners, given that such moderation will certainly tick off (and drive away) some male right-wing chauvinists?

I do not expect answers to the above questions. Matter-of-fact, they are posed solely as rhetorical questions. As the recent events on this forum have shown, the change in sociology of the users has changed the manner in which we communicate. Many of these new users came here because they had to abandon the sinking ship Calguns. But Calguns has been an echo chamber of certain values and styles, and its long-term members have been self-selected. I for one do not see a gun forum being viable without very strong direction from the top what it wants to be, and without a clear code of conduct that directs posts in that direction, whatever it may be.

Speaking for my wishes and aspirations: A functioning place to buy and sell guns and accessories satisfies me.

 

[H. Bowman]

Not my house nor my rules, but I just had a post deleted saying that I have an 03 FFL and COE and can buy ammo online with it...which was deleted for promoting illegal activity? Odd, but ok.

 

[ikeo1]

Not my house nor my rules, but I just had a post deleted saying that I have an 03 FFL and COE and can buy ammo online with it...which was deleted for promoting illegal activity? Odd, but ok.

It wasn’t your reply but the quote you had in your reply. We have to be very careful and want to protect our members and site. It’s better to be safe than sorry.

Since the preference was to delete vs edit. We went with that route

 

[listlessharpist]

Growth is hard and when you get a mix of people from several places, there's bound to be conflict. We're trying our best to keep the vibe here chill and welcoming. As such, we do delete posts or parts of them from time to time and want your feedback.

We're not banning anyone, unless they're spammers or potential threats, but we do moderate quite a bit. We try to neutralize any before they start because we've seen what can happen and don't want that to happen here.

So I'm asking do you approve of moderation? Our goal is not to censor anything, we like discourse. It is hard on our part since we're still getting the hang of it. So I'm opening it up for discussion as the site grows and I am getting more reports in general.

If we delete your post or parts of it, it's because we're trying to keep things chill without escalating things.

You can do a three strike then ban?

• Strike 1: warning. With reduced account privileges for 48 hours.
• Strike 2: short term suspension, like a week.
• Strike 3: Ban.
  • Regarding a ban, I think it would be cool to have an appeal process for someone to reinstate their account if they chose to do so.
    • It can be reviewed by us, the peers. It can also be revised my the moderation team. You can make it a weekly or monthly fiasco where we vote on whether we accept them back.

Regarding all disciplinary actions, I do think there should be a profile indicator that shows exactly what happened.

 

[treelogger]

How about dog whistle? As means to get around rules that ban certain posts:

• Can't promote breaking the law? Just say "concealed is concealed" or "you are the kind of person who follows the speed limit".
• Conspiracy theories? Don't link to a YouTube video that explains how the Democratic Party is controlled by Reptilians who live in the basement underneath a pizza parlor in a DC suburb. Instead just using the word "plandemic".
• Pepe the frog, as a meme or avatar. Easy way to bring politics into any discussion. Less common in gun forums is the use of hammer and sickle, or the fist holding up a Kalashnikov.

It is hard to moderate in a world where free speech has learned to use just buzzwords or memes. That doesn't mean that moderation is impossible or not desirable, or a certain style of moderation is preferable.

 

[H. Bowman]

Here, we want to get you on the range. Volunteer at your club, take a class, learn to reload, see what we can do collectively, that sort of thing. Help you find your first firearm, safety class, and whatever else to make a better citizen.

This is rad and I appreciate the heck out of it.

 

[DrJonesUSA]

Absolutely, but hard to combine efforts when one party comes to the table and the other party ignores the invitation to the table.

Not judging, but if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

 

[Mudcamper]

Delete posts, move posts, but NEVER edit posts. That's almost like putting words in people's mouths, which is infuriating. Just one man's opinion, and you know what they say about opinions.

 

[treelogger]

Would the following quote be worthy of moderating? If yes, should it be deleted, edited (bad words removed), the user warned, or banned?

I feel like a caged Gorilla right about now! FWIW: I'd love nothing more, than to crack some f'ing liberal skulls; after seeing the evil/liberal assassination conspiracy attempt on our true CIC/POTUS, life. The fact that these evil liberal mother fu*kers are given free rein to attack our Country (our Freedoms) in this manner, should be a warning to everyone....

But all some of these weak pathetic liberal CG OT pussies seem to care about, it the f*cking Ukraine! While here in America, our Country/Freedoms are being systematically destroyed, from within by these filthy self-serving Treasonous MF'S!

And just to be 100% clear: I am quoting the above text not as an indication that I agree or disagree with it, simply as a didactic example of what moderation would have to deal with, and to reinforce the importance of the question "how do you want us to moderate". And make no mistake, the Calguns forum (from which the above is a snippet) is actually heavily moderated; as an example, a post made this morning at 10:33 by user SanDiego619 has been removed (already, it's only a little past 11). The above post is likely there because the moderators / owner want it to remain.

 

[-D.M.-]

Would the following quote be worthy of moderating? If yes, should it be deleted, edited (bad words removed), the user warned, or banned?



And just to be 100% clear: I am quoting the above text not as an indication that I agree or disagree with it, simply as a didactic example of what moderation would have to deal with, and to reinforce the importance of the question "how do you want us to moderate". And make no mistake, the Calguns forum (from which the above is a snippet) is actually heavily moderated; as an example, a post made this morning at 10:33 by user SanDiego619 has been removed (already, it's only a little past 11). The above post is likely there because the moderators / owner want it to remain.

I would think you'd know where that "quote" falls in their stated boundaries. To me, it's intellectually dishonest to be asking and posting it, because again, I see that as trying to be sneaky and find a way to post the exact they've been crystal clear they don't want here. And especially from that particular douchebag who is notorious for posting almost nonstop.

 

[ikeo1]

Would the following quote be worthy of moderating? If yes, should it be deleted, edited (bad words removed), the user warned, or banned?



And just to be 100% clear: I am quoting the above text not as an indication that I agree or disagree with it, simply as a didactic example of what moderation would have to deal with, and to reinforce the importance of the question "how do you want us to moderate". And make no mistake, the Calguns forum (from which the above is a snippet) is actually heavily moderated; as an example, a post made this morning at 10:33 by user SanDiego619 has been removed (already, it's only a little past 11). The above post is likely there because the moderators / owner want it to remain.

Things will never reach that level here. That hostility isn’t what we want. We do not need to grow large. I’m perfectly fine with this site being smaller where respecting one another the #1 rule.

Range rules apply here. Leave your at home.