HankT
State Researcher
imported post
Hawkflyer wrote:
Hawkflyer wrote:
Which question(s) are you referring to, Hawk?
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Zen and the Art of Forum Maintenance
- Thread starter Collier4385
- Start date
Hawkflyer
Founder's Club Member
imported post
HankT wrote:
Reverend73 wrote:
HankT wrote:
OBJECTION! Point of order. Roberts Rules of Order. The post is out of order. There is a question before the forum.
Reverend73 wrote:
HankT
State Researcher
imported post
Hawkflyer wrote:
These questions preceded Reverend73's:
HankT wrote:
Hawkflyer wrote:
These questions preceded Reverend73's:
HankT wrote:
Longwatch hasyet to answer them.
Hawkflyer
Founder's Club Member
imported post
I hate to burst your bubble but people have been asking you these questions for at least two weeks, which precedes this entire thread.
I personally asked you about the schedule of events for a MMM meet up over two weeks ago. The OC question is a lot older than that.
I hate to burst your bubble but people have been asking you these questions for at least two weeks, which precedes this entire thread.
I personally asked you about the schedule of events for a MMM meet up over two weeks ago. The OC question is a lot older than that.
HankT
State Researcher
imported post
Hawkflyer wrote:
Oh, please. Session was adjourned. Today's session startsanew. Longwatch, the floor is yours.
Oh, and incidental motion is made to adopt the following correspondence as reference and background for this important deliberation. PMs from a coupleof weeks ago:
From: Hawkflyer
Date: 2007-05-26 23:26:45
Subject: Re: Hey
Hank,
At the time that was happening, for me time stopped. It was a very surreal feeling, but not the first time I was at the wrong end of a gun. Just the first time a cop was on the other end. There was another guy with me and our wives were both in a townhouse about 50 yards away. They looked out the window and moved to the rear of the house to avoid any stray gunfire. After it was over, we walked up and they are both yelling to us "Where were you guys, you really missed all the excitement".
I have never looked at LEOs the same since that night, and I work in LE, and used to be a LEO. When the only weapons you have left to you are compliance, and a calming voice inflection, you get a very unique view of the universe.
The next day I contacted the VSP and filed a complaint against the first LEO on the scene. That is how I found out he was new. But despite filing with Prince William, VSP, Alexandria, and Fairfax county, (all four were involved), AFAIK the worst that happened to any of them, was additional training in felony stops for the first guy on scene.
The whole story is really a keystone cops tail up until the final stop and "detainment". Sometime maybe we can trade stories over lunch.
As for twisting, you can ignore a direct question better than anyone I have ever seen. Which reminds me, I should apologize to you for suggesting you might not be at the BBQ. I meant it one way, and by the time I figured out it could be read another way, it was too late to take it back. I did cut something that on reflection was not fair from the original post. But I missed that one completely. Sorry for the implication.
Anyway, It is good to know that you are not offended. See you in the ring.
Unambiguously White
_____Original Message_____
From: HankT
Date: 2007-05-26 22:57:19
Subject: Re: Hey
Hey, brother. Nah, I don't take it seriously. But I was wondering if you were... heheh. I had a great line about you being unambiguously white but I passed on it, just in case.
I enjoy all the stuff (except your rotating some of my points by exactly 180 degrees. If I ever have sufficient time, I'll crush you with a point by point.
BTW, thanks for the favorable comment in the Does HankT OC thread. That was cool.
I'd been meaning to send a note on that. I sent one to Bob and_____ and both were very kind.
Man, that must have been a f**king scary night when you got mistaken for the robbers. I meant what I said about your handling of it. It's always impressive when one man can keep his head about him when all others are losing theirs.
HankT
_____Original Message_____
From: Hawkflyer
Date: 2007-05-26 22:32:52
Subject: Hey
Hank,
While it may be presumptuous of me to ask, I hope you don't take all this debate too personally. I don't, and frankly I do look forward to our "Chats".
It keeps the wits sharp, and it clearly gets people thinking.
Have a good holiday
Regards
Hawkflyer wrote:
Oh, please. Session was adjourned. Today's session startsanew. Longwatch, the floor is yours.
Oh, and incidental motion is made to adopt the following correspondence as reference and background for this important deliberation. PMs from a coupleof weeks ago:
From: Hawkflyer
Date: 2007-05-26 23:26:45
Subject: Re: Hey
Hank,
At the time that was happening, for me time stopped. It was a very surreal feeling, but not the first time I was at the wrong end of a gun. Just the first time a cop was on the other end. There was another guy with me and our wives were both in a townhouse about 50 yards away. They looked out the window and moved to the rear of the house to avoid any stray gunfire. After it was over, we walked up and they are both yelling to us "Where were you guys, you really missed all the excitement".
I have never looked at LEOs the same since that night, and I work in LE, and used to be a LEO. When the only weapons you have left to you are compliance, and a calming voice inflection, you get a very unique view of the universe.
The next day I contacted the VSP and filed a complaint against the first LEO on the scene. That is how I found out he was new. But despite filing with Prince William, VSP, Alexandria, and Fairfax county, (all four were involved), AFAIK the worst that happened to any of them, was additional training in felony stops for the first guy on scene.
The whole story is really a keystone cops tail up until the final stop and "detainment". Sometime maybe we can trade stories over lunch.
As for twisting, you can ignore a direct question better than anyone I have ever seen. Which reminds me, I should apologize to you for suggesting you might not be at the BBQ. I meant it one way, and by the time I figured out it could be read another way, it was too late to take it back. I did cut something that on reflection was not fair from the original post. But I missed that one completely. Sorry for the implication.
Anyway, It is good to know that you are not offended. See you in the ring.
Unambiguously White
_____Original Message_____
From: HankT
Date: 2007-05-26 22:57:19
Subject: Re: Hey
Hey, brother. Nah, I don't take it seriously. But I was wondering if you were... heheh. I had a great line about you being unambiguously white but I passed on it, just in case.
I enjoy all the stuff (except your rotating some of my points by exactly 180 degrees. If I ever have sufficient time, I'll crush you with a point by point.
BTW, thanks for the favorable comment in the Does HankT OC thread. That was cool.
I'd been meaning to send a note on that. I sent one to Bob and_____ and both were very kind.
Man, that must have been a f**king scary night when you got mistaken for the robbers. I meant what I said about your handling of it. It's always impressive when one man can keep his head about him when all others are losing theirs.
HankT
_____Original Message_____
From: Hawkflyer
Date: 2007-05-26 22:32:52
Subject: Hey
Hank,
While it may be presumptuous of me to ask, I hope you don't take all this debate too personally. I don't, and frankly I do look forward to our "Chats".
It keeps the wits sharp, and it clearly gets people thinking.
Have a good holiday
Regards
Tomahawk
Regular Member
imported post
Crise, does anyone actually read all that crap? I think Hank may be a bot. Anyone here remember Dr. Sbaitso?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Sbaitso
Crise, does anyone actually read all that crap? I think Hank may be a bot. Anyone here remember Dr. Sbaitso?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Sbaitso
BobCav
Founder's Club Member
imported post
Thanks for posting those PM's! You have actually proved my point and reinforced my position by showing thatI have made every effort to be reasonable with you and have given you every doubt possible. You forgot one that I included at the bottom of this post.
I was honest and sincere and don't pretent to be anything I'm not. What I did in those PM'swas calledgiving you the benefit of the doubt and trying to treat you decent. Turning the other cheek as it were. Something I learned as a child, but apparently it was lost on you.
Show us your postings from any other gun forum. What name do you go by on those? All those guns and no other place on the net to hang out but here? I'm interested to read your posts on other forumsto see if you're equally as condescending to them as you are here.
_____Original Message_____
From: BobCav
Date: 2007-06-07 20:26:43
Subject: Re: Forum Moderation & Feedback Thread
Hank,
I plan on keeping it open a few more days to get a better sampling.
I'm going to be honest here Hank, and I'm speaking for the forum as I've had many complaints about you, as have John and Mike.
Your comments in that post, as with many posts, are counterproductive to both yourself and to the forum. You asked way too many questions and in the context, they are taken negatively as sharp sarcasm.
Hank, you seem to be intelligent and you actually do have a lot to offer butyour poor forum social skills are killing you on OCDO. You criticize posters, berate and belittle them in one post and expect everyone to laugh when you tell a joke two posts later and it's just not going to happen. Then you tell everyone just how the forum should be run, what you think isacceptable and what's not (Your own ideas of quality),and the only thing you've accomplished is to further alienate yourself from the rest of us. Let's be honest, your not going to change anyone here and that old line "that if it saves just one life" or "if you change just one person's mind", then it'll be worth it, is flawed logic. The end does NOT justify the means.
When someone makes a legitimate counterpoint back to you, you resort to picking apart their argument using your own "quality" template and your own standards of discussion and debate. Ifyou don't win an argument or point, you'll rip apart the post for a dozen other reasons from spelling to syntax. That'sextremely anti-social behavior and it's getting old. Nobody cares if they mistake sarcasm for criticism, or know the difference between logic and reasoning or make a few spelling errors now and again. We're all human.
Hank, my "Man In The Arena" post was meant for you. You constantly criticize how the doer or the deed could have done better, criticizing everyone at every turnall the while sitting on the sidelines in the "cheap seats". And in the 900+ posts you've made, you've provided no objective evidence to any of us of your "rabid support of the RKBA" or that you have ever actually been "in the arena". On OCDO, you have ZERO credibility as an OC'er, supporter or even a gun owner!I've defended you and said that perhaps you're just an gunsupporter trying to understand OC, but if this is your idea of support, you can keep it.
With no evidence to the contrary, everyone and I mean EVERYONE thinks that you are an anti. And it's largely because you have been the "voice of opposition" at every turn. If your idea of "rabidly supporting the RKBA" is by berating and beating the members of OCDO into what YOU think we should be, then you're sadly mistaken. Constructive criticism is a positive thing if applied properly. But all we seem toget from you is destructive criticismthatis always harmful. And that is what everyone thinks your intent is. To cause dissent, disrupt the postings, distract from the main points and ultimately harm the forum. But to be honest, it's not harmful to us, we'll carry on. You're only hurting yourself.
It seems that for a forum that has so much wrong with it, you spend an awful lot of time here and that's what people can't figure out. We're all on many different forums, not just gun forums, and nobody in those places acts the way you do on OCDO. If you dislike the posters and our attitudes toward Open Carry or guns in general, they why are you here? Do you think that you will change this forum? A Thread, perhaps?
Hank, this is a family friendly forum and most of us know one another here in NOVA. We have many members phone numbers, have dined together, gone shooting together, stand beside one another in the arena and are a family. Nothing will change that. Not everyone is going to believe what you believe and in the manner in which you believe it. And surprise, there's nothing wrong with that.
You read "Zen..." and it wasn't just for kicks.I know it's a self help book and I know you saw yourself and your life in Phaedrus and that scared the crap out of you. It certainly did for me. When I asked if you were Phaedrus, it struck a chord and I saw that.If you got anything out of that book, it should be that one man's quality is another man's garbage. You cannot and will not get anybody to believe you are anything other that whom you project yourself to be. Whether that's on OCDO or in life, the results is the same.
I don't know why you have such big walls up, that's your personal business, but you cannot expect to continue on OCDOin the same manneras you have and expect things to change.The place to change the world starts first in one's own heart and head and hands.
Have a good night, Hank. My best to you and yours and I hope to see you on the forum.
All The Best,
Bob
_____Original Message_____
From: HankT
Date: 2007-06-07 17:06:20
Subject: Forum Moderation & Feedback Thread
Hiya, Bob. Hope all is well with you and yours.
Couple of questions for you on subject thread.
How long are you gonna hold it open for comments?
Do you oppose my making any of the comments I've made so far? I just posted one and though it is not criticism, it made me wonder.
Cheers,
H
Thanks for posting those PM's! You have actually proved my point and reinforced my position by showing thatI have made every effort to be reasonable with you and have given you every doubt possible. You forgot one that I included at the bottom of this post.
I was honest and sincere and don't pretent to be anything I'm not. What I did in those PM'swas calledgiving you the benefit of the doubt and trying to treat you decent. Turning the other cheek as it were. Something I learned as a child, but apparently it was lost on you.
Show us your postings from any other gun forum. What name do you go by on those? All those guns and no other place on the net to hang out but here? I'm interested to read your posts on other forumsto see if you're equally as condescending to them as you are here.
_____Original Message_____
From: BobCav
Date: 2007-06-07 20:26:43
Subject: Re: Forum Moderation & Feedback Thread
Hank,
I plan on keeping it open a few more days to get a better sampling.
I'm going to be honest here Hank, and I'm speaking for the forum as I've had many complaints about you, as have John and Mike.
Your comments in that post, as with many posts, are counterproductive to both yourself and to the forum. You asked way too many questions and in the context, they are taken negatively as sharp sarcasm.
Hank, you seem to be intelligent and you actually do have a lot to offer butyour poor forum social skills are killing you on OCDO. You criticize posters, berate and belittle them in one post and expect everyone to laugh when you tell a joke two posts later and it's just not going to happen. Then you tell everyone just how the forum should be run, what you think isacceptable and what's not (Your own ideas of quality),and the only thing you've accomplished is to further alienate yourself from the rest of us. Let's be honest, your not going to change anyone here and that old line "that if it saves just one life" or "if you change just one person's mind", then it'll be worth it, is flawed logic. The end does NOT justify the means.
When someone makes a legitimate counterpoint back to you, you resort to picking apart their argument using your own "quality" template and your own standards of discussion and debate. Ifyou don't win an argument or point, you'll rip apart the post for a dozen other reasons from spelling to syntax. That'sextremely anti-social behavior and it's getting old. Nobody cares if they mistake sarcasm for criticism, or know the difference between logic and reasoning or make a few spelling errors now and again. We're all human.
Hank, my "Man In The Arena" post was meant for you. You constantly criticize how the doer or the deed could have done better, criticizing everyone at every turnall the while sitting on the sidelines in the "cheap seats". And in the 900+ posts you've made, you've provided no objective evidence to any of us of your "rabid support of the RKBA" or that you have ever actually been "in the arena". On OCDO, you have ZERO credibility as an OC'er, supporter or even a gun owner!I've defended you and said that perhaps you're just an gunsupporter trying to understand OC, but if this is your idea of support, you can keep it.
With no evidence to the contrary, everyone and I mean EVERYONE thinks that you are an anti. And it's largely because you have been the "voice of opposition" at every turn. If your idea of "rabidly supporting the RKBA" is by berating and beating the members of OCDO into what YOU think we should be, then you're sadly mistaken. Constructive criticism is a positive thing if applied properly. But all we seem toget from you is destructive criticismthatis always harmful. And that is what everyone thinks your intent is. To cause dissent, disrupt the postings, distract from the main points and ultimately harm the forum. But to be honest, it's not harmful to us, we'll carry on. You're only hurting yourself.
It seems that for a forum that has so much wrong with it, you spend an awful lot of time here and that's what people can't figure out. We're all on many different forums, not just gun forums, and nobody in those places acts the way you do on OCDO. If you dislike the posters and our attitudes toward Open Carry or guns in general, they why are you here? Do you think that you will change this forum? A Thread, perhaps?
Hank, this is a family friendly forum and most of us know one another here in NOVA. We have many members phone numbers, have dined together, gone shooting together, stand beside one another in the arena and are a family. Nothing will change that. Not everyone is going to believe what you believe and in the manner in which you believe it. And surprise, there's nothing wrong with that.
You read "Zen..." and it wasn't just for kicks.I know it's a self help book and I know you saw yourself and your life in Phaedrus and that scared the crap out of you. It certainly did for me. When I asked if you were Phaedrus, it struck a chord and I saw that.If you got anything out of that book, it should be that one man's quality is another man's garbage. You cannot and will not get anybody to believe you are anything other that whom you project yourself to be. Whether that's on OCDO or in life, the results is the same.
I don't know why you have such big walls up, that's your personal business, but you cannot expect to continue on OCDOin the same manneras you have and expect things to change.The place to change the world starts first in one's own heart and head and hands.
Have a good night, Hank. My best to you and yours and I hope to see you on the forum.
All The Best,
Bob
_____Original Message_____
From: HankT
Date: 2007-06-07 17:06:20
Subject: Forum Moderation & Feedback Thread
Hiya, Bob. Hope all is well with you and yours.
Couple of questions for you on subject thread.
How long are you gonna hold it open for comments?
Do you oppose my making any of the comments I've made so far? I just posted one and though it is not criticism, it made me wonder.
Cheers,
H
Hawkflyer
Founder's Club Member
imported post
Hank,
You can post all the PRIVATE MESSAGES you want. While ethically I would never do that without your permission first, the fact that you did says a lot about your ethics. I will not bore the forum with the rest of the messages you sent to me or those I sent to you in their true context. Your selection is adequate to show that I have tried to deal with you civilly and in a fair way to resolve differences.
Now back to the questions.
I would accept your claims of adjournment except that you have frequently taken posts from one thread and used them as argument in another, often weeks after the original posting. So what is good for the goose is good for the gander. There is no such thing as an adjournment, your posting style prohibits it.
So again -
What are your plans for the MMM meeting you have told us so much about?
Do you open carry.
Hank,
You can post all the PRIVATE MESSAGES you want. While ethically I would never do that without your permission first, the fact that you did says a lot about your ethics. I will not bore the forum with the rest of the messages you sent to me or those I sent to you in their true context. Your selection is adequate to show that I have tried to deal with you civilly and in a fair way to resolve differences.
Now back to the questions.
I would accept your claims of adjournment except that you have frequently taken posts from one thread and used them as argument in another, often weeks after the original posting. So what is good for the goose is good for the gander. There is no such thing as an adjournment, your posting style prohibits it.
So again -
What are your plans for the MMM meeting you have told us so much about?
Do you open carry.
longwatch
Founder's Club Member - Moderator
imported post
HankT wrote:
HankT wrote:
HankT I'll make a deal with you. I'll answer you when you answer my burning question. You know the one. AMF
HankT
State Researcher
imported post
While longwatch is preparing his answer to the questions at hand and while consideration is being given to the incidental motion to adopt the most recent Hawkflyer-HankT correspondence as reference and background for this important deliberation...
I make a second incidental motion to include a prior HankT-Hawkflyer exchange, agin for the purpose of reference and background to this important deliberation;
_____Original Message_____
From: Hawkflyer
Date: 2007-05-07 00:47:04
Subject: Re: Go Git 'im!
The fact is that a lot of people are just too strident. Any time people start spouting dictum and rhetoric, and think that it somehow replaces original thought and debate, any possibility of reasoned discussion goes right out the window. I can't believe people think we should all have to somehow prove ourselves worthy before we can have a debate on some subject. In internet forums everyone has a right to speak. That does not mean that people have to listen or respond. While I do participate more than some, I do not respond to everything or everyone, nor do I feel I should. If this guy wants to take the discussion personal, he picked the wrong guy.
In principal I think the training concept is very good. The problem that I see is that TSA is iconic in recognizing, without precondition, the RTKABA. Because there is no training requirement that is so obvious that anyone can see it, everyone simply rejects the idea out of hand. While convoluted, I do see a way that a creative person could contend, and therefore legislate, a training requirement, that might stand a court review.
The problem is that very few people will listen to the argument long enough to discuss it. There was a poster who came in at the end who seemed to be creative enough to help analyze the concept.
During our discussion we talked a little about providing relief from some of the regulations that have already been tested in court and survived, in trade for training. I think something like that would be required before people would accept any kind of mandated training. They are NOT going to accept it in trade for a constitutionally recognized right, that they see as absolute.
Regards
_____Original Message_____
From: HankT
Date: 2007-05-06 18:38:02
Subject: Re: Go Git 'im!
Yes, I think "personal attacks" are not a good idea. I don't really mind them in Internet discussions (they used to be part of the ethos of the place) but they often get in the way of good discussion. So I avoid them. Alas, sometimes people cry wolf, citing a "personal attack" on what is simply a rebuttal to their point and is not a personal attack at all. Usually, it's people who are losing a debate...
Hey, a little passion is almost always good. A lot is often good... And to be provocative is good pedagogy. Gotta get their attention before's you can teach 'em! And I think your posts always reflect the teacher in you. That's one of the reasons I like them. I respect good teachers. It ain't easy to do. Especially with an audience of folks who think they know more than they really know. Gotta get their attention...
BTW, I didn't use the "ignore wheel" bit. That was ______. My line was something about people not really wanting an "ignore" button but rather a "I am going to publicly anounce that I'm ignoring you but first I will expound on why you are such a shit and should be ignored" button. LOL.
Finally, the training idea is a win-win thing and, reallly, a no-brainer. I was just talking to a friend of mine who explained to me that in his field, nursing/medical, he has to maintain a certain number of hours of continuing training to keep up his status. It's routine in a lot of fields to have some continuing exposure to usage/training/education. Frankly, I think it is abominable that some folks don't go shooting for many months or even years at a time.
I am very amused (or bemused) by the convoluted positions of those who oppose it.
We're headed into a new phase of the diffusion of gun ownership and gun carry in this country. The "battle" is won already. The next phase is one of refinement/rationalization. I think about such stages and cycles to diffusion all the time in my work. It will assuredly be better for us to improve our collective proficiency than to not do so. One can easily see that if one looks ahead, not back.
Go git 'em, Hawk!
_____Original Message_____
From: Hawkflyer
Date: 2007-05-04 16:46:16
Subject: Re: Go Git 'im!
Well, The problem I am faced with is that I try very hard not to attack people on a personal level. Watching your posts I think you understand that sentiment. Sometimes I do get pissed, and I guess that came through in my last few posts.
I can understand his point of view to some extent. Because I by trade I teach a lot, I recognize that I have a certain presentation style that hits some like it hit him. It is not intentional on my part, and I am not really talking down to people, it just comes off that way to some. LEO229 has the same problem.
Also because I am on the back side of life, I have been around some, and I have interest in a lot of different things. As a result I tend to comment on things I know something about when I probably should just use your now famous "ignore" wheel. (very funny by the way)
On a different note I think your discussion on training requirements was interesting and fun. It made a lot of people think. It brought out a lot of thoughtful people, and the discussion was very high level for the most part. Thanks for bringing up an interesting topic.
Regards
_____Original Message_____
From: HankT
Date: 2007-05-04 11:10:17
Subject: Go Git 'im!
Go for it!
While longwatch is preparing his answer to the questions at hand and while consideration is being given to the incidental motion to adopt the most recent Hawkflyer-HankT correspondence as reference and background for this important deliberation...
I make a second incidental motion to include a prior HankT-Hawkflyer exchange, agin for the purpose of reference and background to this important deliberation;
_____Original Message_____
From: Hawkflyer
Date: 2007-05-07 00:47:04
Subject: Re: Go Git 'im!
The fact is that a lot of people are just too strident. Any time people start spouting dictum and rhetoric, and think that it somehow replaces original thought and debate, any possibility of reasoned discussion goes right out the window. I can't believe people think we should all have to somehow prove ourselves worthy before we can have a debate on some subject. In internet forums everyone has a right to speak. That does not mean that people have to listen or respond. While I do participate more than some, I do not respond to everything or everyone, nor do I feel I should. If this guy wants to take the discussion personal, he picked the wrong guy.
In principal I think the training concept is very good. The problem that I see is that TSA is iconic in recognizing, without precondition, the RTKABA. Because there is no training requirement that is so obvious that anyone can see it, everyone simply rejects the idea out of hand. While convoluted, I do see a way that a creative person could contend, and therefore legislate, a training requirement, that might stand a court review.
The problem is that very few people will listen to the argument long enough to discuss it. There was a poster who came in at the end who seemed to be creative enough to help analyze the concept.
During our discussion we talked a little about providing relief from some of the regulations that have already been tested in court and survived, in trade for training. I think something like that would be required before people would accept any kind of mandated training. They are NOT going to accept it in trade for a constitutionally recognized right, that they see as absolute.
Regards
_____Original Message_____
From: HankT
Date: 2007-05-06 18:38:02
Subject: Re: Go Git 'im!
Yes, I think "personal attacks" are not a good idea. I don't really mind them in Internet discussions (they used to be part of the ethos of the place) but they often get in the way of good discussion. So I avoid them. Alas, sometimes people cry wolf, citing a "personal attack" on what is simply a rebuttal to their point and is not a personal attack at all. Usually, it's people who are losing a debate...
Hey, a little passion is almost always good. A lot is often good... And to be provocative is good pedagogy. Gotta get their attention before's you can teach 'em! And I think your posts always reflect the teacher in you. That's one of the reasons I like them. I respect good teachers. It ain't easy to do. Especially with an audience of folks who think they know more than they really know. Gotta get their attention...
BTW, I didn't use the "ignore wheel" bit. That was ______. My line was something about people not really wanting an "ignore" button but rather a "I am going to publicly anounce that I'm ignoring you but first I will expound on why you are such a shit and should be ignored" button. LOL.
Finally, the training idea is a win-win thing and, reallly, a no-brainer. I was just talking to a friend of mine who explained to me that in his field, nursing/medical, he has to maintain a certain number of hours of continuing training to keep up his status. It's routine in a lot of fields to have some continuing exposure to usage/training/education. Frankly, I think it is abominable that some folks don't go shooting for many months or even years at a time.
I am very amused (or bemused) by the convoluted positions of those who oppose it.
We're headed into a new phase of the diffusion of gun ownership and gun carry in this country. The "battle" is won already. The next phase is one of refinement/rationalization. I think about such stages and cycles to diffusion all the time in my work. It will assuredly be better for us to improve our collective proficiency than to not do so. One can easily see that if one looks ahead, not back.
Go git 'em, Hawk!
_____Original Message_____
From: Hawkflyer
Date: 2007-05-04 16:46:16
Subject: Re: Go Git 'im!
Well, The problem I am faced with is that I try very hard not to attack people on a personal level. Watching your posts I think you understand that sentiment. Sometimes I do get pissed, and I guess that came through in my last few posts.
I can understand his point of view to some extent. Because I by trade I teach a lot, I recognize that I have a certain presentation style that hits some like it hit him. It is not intentional on my part, and I am not really talking down to people, it just comes off that way to some. LEO229 has the same problem.
Also because I am on the back side of life, I have been around some, and I have interest in a lot of different things. As a result I tend to comment on things I know something about when I probably should just use your now famous "ignore" wheel. (very funny by the way)
On a different note I think your discussion on training requirements was interesting and fun. It made a lot of people think. It brought out a lot of thoughtful people, and the discussion was very high level for the most part. Thanks for bringing up an interesting topic.
Regards
_____Original Message_____
From: HankT
Date: 2007-05-04 11:10:17
Subject: Go Git 'im!
Go for it!
BobCav
Founder's Club Member
imported post
Tomahawk wrote:
Tomahawk wrote:
LMAO! Yes, I remember that and Eliza! Now I'm feeling old...
BobCav
Founder's Club Member
imported post
Motion denied, the original question is still on the floor.
Motion denied, the original question is still on the floor.
Hawkflyer
Founder's Club Member
imported post
Please excuse this HankT technique - (IE quoting myself)
Hank,
You can post all the PRIVATE MESSAGES you want. While ethically I would never do that without your permission first, the fact that you did says a lot about your ethics. I will not bore the forum with the rest of the messages you sent to me or those I sent to you in their true context. Your selection is adequate to show that I have tried to deal with you civilly and in a fair way to resolve differences.
Now back to the questions.
I would accept your claims of adjournment except that you have frequently taken posts from one thread and used them as argument in another, often weeks after the original posting. So what is good for the goose is good for the gander. There is no such thing as an adjournment, your posting style prohibits it.
So again -
What are your plans for the MMM meeting you have told us so much about and when is it scheduled?
Do you open carry.
EDIT - Your argument for adjournment between threads also goes out the window when you post out of context PRIVATE MESSAGES from weeks ago. You did forget to post the one where we discussed permissions for posting each others PMs. Oh thats right there wasn't one. While I am on that subject I can't help but notice all the date on these are weeks old. Unlike you I stand by EVERYTHING I write. I do admit that I was very patient with you in all those earlier messages and it took me a while to see you for what you really are. I try to give Anti-rights people the benefit of the doubt.
Please excuse this HankT technique - (IE quoting myself)
Hank,
You can post all the PRIVATE MESSAGES you want. While ethically I would never do that without your permission first, the fact that you did says a lot about your ethics. I will not bore the forum with the rest of the messages you sent to me or those I sent to you in their true context. Your selection is adequate to show that I have tried to deal with you civilly and in a fair way to resolve differences.
Now back to the questions.
I would accept your claims of adjournment except that you have frequently taken posts from one thread and used them as argument in another, often weeks after the original posting. So what is good for the goose is good for the gander. There is no such thing as an adjournment, your posting style prohibits it.
So again -
What are your plans for the MMM meeting you have told us so much about and when is it scheduled?
Do you open carry.
EDIT - Your argument for adjournment between threads also goes out the window when you post out of context PRIVATE MESSAGES from weeks ago. You did forget to post the one where we discussed permissions for posting each others PMs. Oh thats right there wasn't one. While I am on that subject I can't help but notice all the date on these are weeks old. Unlike you I stand by EVERYTHING I write. I do admit that I was very patient with you in all those earlier messages and it took me a while to see you for what you really are. I try to give Anti-rights people the benefit of the doubt.
Reverend73
Founder's Club Member
imported post
HankT wrote:
Edit: Here's what I wrote way back on page 1. So how about you answer my questions.
HankT wrote:
You're half wrong, I asked you when you were planning the MMM/OCDO debate prior to your question of what percentage of OCDO members actually open carry. Go ahead, check. And while you're at it, go ahead and backpedal some more and avoid direct questions. Get a clue.
Edit: Here's what I wrote way back on page 1. So how about you answer my questions.
HankT
State Researcher
imported post
Reverend73 wrote:
Go check my posts of June 3rd and 4th. Mostly in the OCDO meetup? 06/04/07 thread. What you seek is in there.
But I think the whole ideagot scotched when the group of Centreville meeting attending VCDL/OCDCers didn't take my suggestion to apologize to the MMMers, first thing, for the disruption they caused at the Burke meeting. A sincere group apology might have set the stage for an informational debate/discussion as I initially proposed. I recall that I posted several thoughts about that, including a long list of potential topics.
Perhaps, through some inadvertent mishap, you failed to read those posts, Reverend73. But they're there.
Reverend73 wrote:
Go check my posts of June 3rd and 4th. Mostly in the OCDO meetup? 06/04/07 thread. What you seek is in there.
But I think the whole ideagot scotched when the group of Centreville meeting attending VCDL/OCDCers didn't take my suggestion to apologize to the MMMers, first thing, for the disruption they caused at the Burke meeting. A sincere group apology might have set the stage for an informational debate/discussion as I initially proposed. I recall that I posted several thoughts about that, including a long list of potential topics.
Perhaps, through some inadvertent mishap, you failed to read those posts, Reverend73. But they're there.
BB62
Accomplished Advocate
imported post
ENOUGH, ENOUGH, ENOUGH!!
The post immediately preceding this one, the"discussion" to which it refers, indeed the poster himself is a perfect example of thefruits of thelaissez faire approach to moderation here.
Please, please address this situation, Bob, Mike, and John, more strongly and effectively than has been the case in the past.
As for you Hank, and I apologize that I am not as tempered or smooth as Bob -you simply need to grow up.
My God, man, what do you think is to be gained from your approach, your quoting of HUGE portions of previous posts just to say a few (or a lot) of words, indeed by your continued presence here?
If you have wisdom to share, or pots to be stirred for the common good, your approach is sadly lacking. If you are here to contribute for the collective good, then why not simply recognize that the net effect of your posts and your approach does not add up to a contribution?
Moderators, I am sorry to go more public with these thoughts than I have in the past, but at some point one has to rise up and say "No more!"
Please address the issues I and others have raised in the moderation thread, for the benefit of all.
BB62
ENOUGH, ENOUGH, ENOUGH!!
The post immediately preceding this one, the"discussion" to which it refers, indeed the poster himself is a perfect example of thefruits of thelaissez faire approach to moderation here.
Please, please address this situation, Bob, Mike, and John, more strongly and effectively than has been the case in the past.
As for you Hank, and I apologize that I am not as tempered or smooth as Bob -you simply need to grow up.
My God, man, what do you think is to be gained from your approach, your quoting of HUGE portions of previous posts just to say a few (or a lot) of words, indeed by your continued presence here?
If you have wisdom to share, or pots to be stirred for the common good, your approach is sadly lacking. If you are here to contribute for the collective good, then why not simply recognize that the net effect of your posts and your approach does not add up to a contribution?
Moderators, I am sorry to go more public with these thoughts than I have in the past, but at some point one has to rise up and say "No more!"
Please address the issues I and others have raised in the moderation thread, for the benefit of all.
BB62
Reverend73
Founder's Club Member
imported post
Hank, I have read your posts from 3 and 4 June and find nowhere that you answer my question( care to post a link??) . Here is the question in case you are lacking in your reading comprehension. When are you planning the debate? The answer should be either, "I am planning it for XX AUG (or whatever month youwant)2007 and XXXXpm at XX location" or " I am not planning a debate." Simple as that. Answer the question.
Hank, I have read your posts from 3 and 4 June and find nowhere that you answer my question( care to post a link??) . Here is the question in case you are lacking in your reading comprehension. When are you planning the debate? The answer should be either, "I am planning it for XX AUG (or whatever month youwant)2007 and XXXXpm at XX location" or " I am not planning a debate." Simple as that. Answer the question.
HankT
State Researcher
imported post
Reverend73 wrote:
It's in there. I'm sure you can find it. I posted a long list of potential tops. Hawkflyer even said he couldapprove of a discussion/debate somewhat based on my list and explanations of the suggestion I'd made.
By the way, REV, speaking of not being able to find something, I know you voted in the Does HankT Actually Open Carry? poll thread last night. You said so. But now I cannot locate the thread. Maybe BobCav removed it?
Can't figure out why Bob would remove a 3 or 4 page thread/poll that he started. There must be a reason...but I just can't figure it out. He starts a thread to make fun (good fun) of me, then keeps insisting that the question before the forum is whether or not "HankT Actually Open Carr[ies]" but then pulls the thread that is exactly about that.
Can't figure it out. But Bob must have a reason for it. I just can't figure it out.
Reverend73 wrote:
It's in there. I'm sure you can find it. I posted a long list of potential tops. Hawkflyer even said he couldapprove of a discussion/debate somewhat based on my list and explanations of the suggestion I'd made.
By the way, REV, speaking of not being able to find something, I know you voted in the Does HankT Actually Open Carry? poll thread last night. You said so. But now I cannot locate the thread. Maybe BobCav removed it?
Can't figure out why Bob would remove a 3 or 4 page thread/poll that he started. There must be a reason...but I just can't figure it out. He starts a thread to make fun (good fun) of me, then keeps insisting that the question before the forum is whether or not "HankT Actually Open Carr[ies]" but then pulls the thread that is exactly about that.
Can't figure it out. But Bob must have a reason for it. I just can't figure it out.
Hawkflyer
Founder's Club Member
imported post
A poll of the users on the questions below is irrelevant to the ACTUAL answers. In a review of your posts on this forum you have failed at every opportunity to answer ANY direct question put to you on ANY subject with a simple DIRECT answer.
So again -
1) What are your plans for the MMM meeting you have told us so much about and when is it scheduled?
2) Do you open carry.
A poll of the users on the questions below is irrelevant to the ACTUAL answers. In a review of your posts on this forum you have failed at every opportunity to answer ANY direct question put to you on ANY subject with a simple DIRECT answer.
So again -
1) What are your plans for the MMM meeting you have told us so much about and when is it scheduled?
2) Do you open carry.