# Should AT have a seperate Traditional Bowhunting forum



## WindWalker (Jan 23, 2005)

In the thread created by "Double S" regarding the same question as this thread now asks, so far 135 members have voted but it appears that not the same number of voters have posted, and there are presently 90 members opposed but not all 90 have posted a reason as to why they are opposed. Granted, posting a reason to support your vote is in no way mandatory, but I am just curious about the sudden increase in visits to the Trad forum.

Let us see if the numbers remain the same if the voter is identified. In this poll your forum ID will be listed and how you voted. No posting of reason is required to support your vote. If you firmly stand behind your decision you should have no problem letting all of the members know who you/we are.


----------



## WindWalker (Jan 23, 2005)

ttt


----------



## GPW (May 12, 2012)

It gives everybody a CHOICE ... I vote *Yes* .... just a few clicks for the Admin , and you can hang out with similar mindsets...


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

I vote yes.


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

I voted no, for the same reason I voted no before. I think it would would further seperate archers, for no benefit. The same debates will take place on both forums. If you had a seperate forum for target archers, that only shoot the exact same equipment, the same way, with the same form, you'd have debates on what clothes to wear, how you hold your mouth, and whether tinted glasses are an unfair advantage or not. It's just human nature.


As to having your ID shown, it doesn't bother me in the least. I wouldn't say anything on here that I wouldn't say to a person's face. Having said that, a lot of people will gladly vote if their vote is kept private. After all, that's the American way. Many people don't particularly want to be attacked or looked at differently (and they will be, just look at the responses on the other poll), simply because they voted a certain way on one particular issue. That's human nature too. 

KPC


----------



## BowmanJay (Jan 1, 2007)

There should be no seperation, the very things we discuss here apply to all who shoot target or hunting. I dont know why people think they dont?


----------



## Old Sarge (Sep 9, 2008)

I voted no for the same reason I gave in the other thread.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Just as no for just as many reasons.


----------



## Wayko (Dec 22, 2011)

Voted "Yes" Guess I don't see what it would hurt to try it out, I think ya can still read & post on both.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

I voted no - this section is already #29 on the AT forum list, split it up again and it may disappear all together. Besides we would lose out on lots of "I can't shoot paper for beans, but put hair on it and I'm money" threads.


----------



## WindWalker (Jan 23, 2005)

> As to having your ID shown, it doesn't bother me in the least. I wouldn't say anything on here that I wouldn't say to a person's face. Having said that, a lot of people will gladly vote if their vote is kept private. After all, that's the American way. Many people don't particularly want to be attacked or looked at differently (and they will be, just look at the responses on the other poll), simply because they voted a certain way on one particular issue. That's human nature too.


The members of any group in which their vote affects the rights of others is always open and a matter of record _e.g., Federal and State House and Senate, POTUS, city councils, county boards, school boards, etc, etc._ 

In this matter, knowing the archery background and primary archery interest of those who voted “no” is not for the purpose of finger-pointing or to incite animosity. Rather, being that the original poll is apparently to be somewhat germane in AT’s decision as to whether a “Traditional Bowhunting” forum will be created, it is only fair to those that are primarily bowhunters and do want a traditional bowhunting forum that it be known how many members that vote “no” are not bowhunters or seldom bowhunt. 

Being it has now been made quite clear that the bowhunting forum is not meant to separate the strictly or primarily target shooter from those that are strictly or primarily bowhunters, then the question must be asked; WHY would a non-bowhunter or those who seldom bowhunt vote to deprive others of what they would like to have? Hopefully, the-powers-to-be in AT that will eventually decide will also consider why many of those that are not bowhunters or seldom bowhunt would vote “no.”

I may piss off some, and I do not care, but it is my opinion that some that are strictly or primarily target shooters that have voted “no” are again demonstrating what they constantly do in many of the threads; they hijack the threads with their elitist target/3-D, over-the-top techy-talk, BS and eventually the thread turns into a meaningless, self-serving, look-down-the-nose, and berating mess of crap that is eventually locked down. Now some of the same people/types want to hijack an entire forum.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

LOL 
Centershot


For me - my love of hunting turned into a love of archery - and it is all one in my book - though all of my archery is specifically geard toward hunting - I love any reason to shoot my bow. I wonder what these guys who think there should be a section specific to bowhunting only forum - do all year long - does their bow hang in a closet? If you are not hunting - and you are shooting your bow - you are shooting at targets - be they stumps, 3D, paper - whatever.

I think back to Ken Beck's awesome answer when asked what the advantages and disadvantages of traditional archery are - his brilliant reply was as follows: "The disadvantage of traditional archery is that you have to shoot a lot of arrows to get good, the advantage of traditional archery is that you have to shoot a lot of arrows to get good".

You are not going to shoot a lot of arrows hunting alone - the only waly to shoot a lot of arrows is to shoot at targets. You cannot seperate bowhunting from target shooting - unless of course you are like some of the compound guys who put their bow in a closet till the week before bow season - but even those guys shoot at targets for a little while before season opens.

There is no difference between shooing at a stump or a 3D target - a target is a target - if anything a case could be made that 3D is better practice for hunting than stumps - since - after all - very few of us hunt anything that even looks like a stump - the 3D targets at least look like what we hunt.

It seems to me that the advocates of the seperation don't get the Ken Beck quote - and are really missing out on how much fun traditional archery really can be - all year long.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

When I first started reading the AT trad forum around mid 2000 it seemed pretty civil, slightly less than "Stickbow target archery" but more so than some of the other trad forums. The problem isn't hunting vs. target. It is a people thing. But, you could have a hunting *sub-forum* and have this one be the main forum. I don't know if it would solve anything, but I don't know that it would hurt anything either. So rather than split off trad into hunting and target, just make sub-forums for them and keep the general. If nobody posts in them, who cares, because we'll still have the general trad forum. But, I think keeping the forum general and bouncing people who can't follow the rules of decorum is the way to go.


----------



## mrjeffro (Jul 25, 2007)

BowmanJay said:


> There should be no seperation, the very things we discuss here apply to all who shoot target or hunting. I dont know why people think they dont?


I agree


----------



## Moebow (Jul 8, 2010)

WW, I don't see where the listing for those that voted is listed. 

I voted no simply because I see it as "archery" plain and simple. How a person elects to "employ" their archery skills is a personal decision. I also can't see that there is any real correlation connecting "no" votes to just target shooters, am I miss understanding your post above? Can you tell from my profile whether I am a "target" shooter or "hunter?" I bet you will guess wrong. I enjoy all forms of archery, from "paper" to "hair" but when I instruct/coach, I teach archery form to the best of my ability, skill, and knowledge. I can't tell anything from your profile since it is not filled out at all.

Anyway, FWIW, my opinion is that it should not be split.

Arne


----------



## WindWalker (Jan 23, 2005)

> I also can't see that there is any real correlation connecting "no" votes to just target shooters,


I don't know of anyone that has yet said or implied that all the "no" votes are by target shooters. As for knowing or eventually knowing who is strictly or primarily a target shooter or bowhunter; no sweat, if not already known it eventually will be.

And, again...for the umpteenth time: Why are some using the terms "split" and "separation" when it has been made quite clear that is not the case.


----------



## Arrowwood (Nov 16, 2010)

Maybe because the word "separate" is in the poll question.


----------



## teamorion22 (Sep 27, 2010)

i voted yes. I understand both sides and either way I'll visit both forums, if they are split. BUT I am only interested in bowhunting, and the more I learn about archery the more I see differences between hunters and target archers. Both are great, but becoming a better hunter is my reason for being here. Although, many techniques used by target archers can enhance the bowhunter so again, I see both sides.


----------



## BigCnyn (Nov 5, 2008)

I voted NO, Same ,, archery is archery, 
The things I use in Target, I am able to use hunting and It Makes me a better shot for Hunting..


----------



## WindWalker (Jan 23, 2005)

> Maybe because the word "separate" is in the poll question.


But not as you believe it to mean......but also I see I misspelled "separate." I be under-ejubacated.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

I voted no as before.



> Granted, posting a reason to support your vote is in no way mandatory, but I am just curious about the sudden increase in visits to the Trad forum.


How many visits is normal? "PVC Pipe Bows" has 1,772 more hits than the original poll on a bowhunting forum. Only 90 getting involved in that discussion constitutes a minority of visits. NO?


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Sanford said:


> I voted no as before.
> 
> 
> 
> How many visits is normal? "PVC Pipe Bows" has 1,772 more hits than the original poll on a bowhunting forum. Only 90 getting involved in that discussion constitutes a minority of visits. NO?


Perhaps we need a separate PVC Pipe Bow forum? :embara:


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

I voted no on this one too. Although I was an archer first, I would self-classify myself as mainly a bowhunter since even though I shoot year round I don't compete in any archery events. 

In my opinion 98% of bowhunting is the hunting part and doesn't matter if you are using a recurve, longbow, selfbow, or compound. Another sub forum just dilutes what we have.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

I am so sorry to those of you that would like a separate forum but I have voted no 

I new nothing of 3 d shoots or target shooting Etc. when I came here. All I knew of was hunting and shooting alone for practice or with my kids. 

Since taking part on these forums I have been to a bunch of big 3 d shoots and I have meet many great people and have shot with folks like John Wert etc. 

I have learned a lot about something I thought I knew all about. I was introuduced to ILF bows and with a stable of customs Schafers, Widows , Fedoras etc the 2 bows I am shooting now are ILF rigs so that speaks volumes of what I have picked up here.

I love archery from bent over snap shooting to Olympic paper punching. I don't shoot with sights but who could not admire an olympians form and try to bring what does apply over to their own shooting.

And last but certainly not least the folks that wanna fight will find a place too no matter how you try and separate them. Thats also part of what the Internet is for


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

WindWalker said:


> The members of any group in which their vote affects the rights of others is always open and a matter of record _e.g., Federal and State House and Senate, POTUS, city councils, county boards, school boards, etc, etc._
> 
> In this matter, knowing the archery background and primary archery interest of those who voted “no” is not for the purpose of finger-pointing or to incite animosity. Rather, being that the original poll is apparently to be somewhat germane in AT’s decision as to whether a “Traditional Bowhunting” forum will be created, it is only fair to those that are primarily bowhunters and do want a traditional bowhunting forum that it be known how many members that vote “no” are not bowhunters or seldom bowhunt.
> 
> ...


Windy, your premise is all wrong as to the numbers and potential skew. The "purely" target shooters here are the minority and cannot move a vote one way or the other.

Remember this, your own poll, one which garnered 139 votes with far less participation than Double S's: http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1057748&highlight=poll

Bowhuntng
81 - 58.27%

Target competition
20 - 14.39%

Primarily bowhunting, some target competition
33 - 23.74%

Primarily target competition, some bowhunting
10 - 7.19%

By you own poll, "bowhunting only" dominated all in numbers. I know you don't like the vote, but the fact remains by any poll; The majority of folks here are bowhunters, the majority of folks here like target stuff and bowhunting stuff in one place and together.


----------



## trapperDave (Mar 12, 2005)

2/3 vote no, same as the other thread


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

GEREP said:


> I voted no, for the same reason I voted no before. I think it would would further seperate archers, for no benefit. *The same debates will take place on both forums.* If you had a seperate forum for target archers, that only shoot the exact same equipment, the same way, with the same form, you'd have debates on what clothes to wear, how you hold your mouth, and whether tinted glasses are an unfair advantage or not. It's just human nature.
> 
> 
> As to having your ID shown, it doesn't bother me in the least. I wouldn't say anything on here that I wouldn't say to a person's face. Having said that, a lot of people will gladly vote if their vote is kept private. After all, that's the American way. Many people don't particularly want to be attacked or looked at differently (and they will be, just look at the responses on the other poll), simply because they voted a certain way on one particular issue. That's human nature too.
> ...


Not true... what are you afraid of anyway? Show me right now one single thread over the first several pages of posts regarding BOWHUNTING! You want to talk about shooting, equipment, targets, etc, have little to do with Bowhunting in the manner that I WANT TO DISCUSS BOWHUNTING... It would be nice to be able to click on a traditional archery sub forum dedicated to JUST BOWHUNTING... and the debates would most certainly NOT be discussed on both. You're not going to be discussing gap/split on bowhunting. Instead, it would be shoot high, under or through brush.


----------



## sawtoothscream (Apr 19, 2008)

BowmanJay said:


> There should be no seperation, the very things we discuss here apply to all who shoot target or hunting. I dont know why people think they dont?


I voted no for this same reason


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Easykeeper said:


> I voted no on this one too. Although I was an archer first, I would self-classify myself as mainly a bowhunter since even though I shoot year round I don't compete in any archery events.
> 
> In my opinion 98% of bowhunting is the hunting part and doesn't matter if you are using a recurve, longbow, selfbow, or compound. Another sub forum just dilutes what we have.


How does a sub-forum dilute traditional archers. Just as a reminder, several here have suggesting going elsewhere to find what we seek. Does this make sense when what we're asking for is to seek what we want HERE????

Aloha...  :beer:


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

rattus58 said:


> Not true... what are you afraid of anyway? Show me right now one single thread over the first several pages of posts regarding BOWHUNTING! You want to talk about shooting, equipment, targets, etc, have little to do with Bowhunting in the manner that I WANT TO DISCUSS BOWHUNTING... It would be nice to be able to click on a traditional archery sub forum dedicated to JUST BOWHUNTING... and the debates would most certainly NOT be discussed on both. You're not going to be discussing gap/split on bowhunting. Instead, it would be shoot high, under or through brush.


"How to Break Into Traditional Hunting" is still on the front page and got 30 replies with no controversy over target stuff.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Sanford said:


> "How to Break Into Traditional Hunting" is still on the front page and got 30 replies with no controversy over target stuff.


 Precisely my point. If you had that thread, plus other BOWHUNTING threads on a separate forum, people like me who REALLY IS 99% bowhunting and now bowbuilding as well... with hunting the focus down the road, I'd prefer to click on an interest of mine instead of having to wade through dozens of posts and threads of tying catwhisker... but that too is hunting related. What are you guys so afraid of anyway? I'm strictly Traditional Style hunter. I don't like going to the Bowhunting forum and don't. Having a traditional bowhunting sub_forum here makes sense, in my opinion and on that thread you're referencing, it would be front and center in a bowhunting forum... where here its buried amongst a ton of stuff I'd prefer to not have to wade through.

Aloha... :beer:


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

I think maybe a traditional bowhunter style and Oly style separation might be good. Both would have target shooting topics. I feel both are very different.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

cbrunson said:


> I think maybe a traditional bowhunter style and Oly style separation might be good. Both would have target shooting topics. I feel both are very different.


We have that already. There is a FITA forum for Olympic style sight shooting.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

The easiest thing for AT to do is just start a "Traditional _Bowhunting_" forum and see how it goes. I've posted my opinion several times (I like things the way they are), but I guess when push comes to shove I really don't care. I visit several forums on AT everyday, one more would just be one more. 

It seems like there is a very passionate minority that would like a new forum, seems like an easy compromise to just do it. Maybe it _would_ turn out to be something that that isn't covered by the Bowhunting or Traditional forums as they now exist.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

Warbow said:


> We have that already. There is a FITA forum for Olympic style sight shooting.


Then maybe that's where all the "why do people want 50# bows?" threads should go.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

What we really need is a bickering forum - if you are looking for a fight go post up and have it out - we could have sub forums for Instinctive bickering and Target vs. Hunting Bickering.

Matt


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

cbrunson said:


> Then maybe that's where all the "why do people want 50# bows?" threads should go.


Why? Frankly the FITA folks are much less prone buy 50# bows as starter bows--they are interested in precision archery and less subject to what seems me to be "macho bow advice syndrome". (Not that _some_ people can't handle 50# starter bows, Black Wolf :wink: )


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Matt_Potter said:


> What we really need is a bickering forum - if you are looking for a fight go post up and have it out - we could have sub forums for Instinctive bickering and Target vs. Hunting Bickering.
> 
> Matt


Yeah? Well I disagree, and I suggest we move to the Bicker Forum to argue about it


----------



## Arcus (Jul 7, 2005)

Matt_Potter said:


> What we really need is a bickering forum - if you are looking for a fight go post up and have it out - we could have sub forums for Instinctive bickering and Target vs. Hunting Bickering.


:lol3:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Matt_Potter said:


> What we really need is a bickering forum - if you are looking for a fight go post up and have it out - we could have sub forums for Instinctive bickering and Target vs. Hunting Bickering.


LOL...now that's funny but true :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

rattus58 said:


> ... where here its buried amongst a ton of stuff I'd prefer to not have to wade through.
> 
> Aloha... :beer:


But, rattus, you still seem to participate in about everything here, anyways. So, I don't think you have had to wade through, maybe got yourself stuck in, but not having to wade though. Wade through would imply avoidance of. If the other conversations are the only game in town, just start starting some you like. If you prefer non-sighted, non-shooting style, non-equipment type posts, start a few and get a feel for what attention they garner. If they are truly deserving of their own private filter, that should become apparent. Thread topics getting lost in others is not the same as getting pushed out. It's just low participation in topic starts and low response to keep em bumped up.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

There is still this fixation on using the term Traditional. Apart from using a recurve or longbow, what changes you from being a bowhunter into a "Traditional" bowhunter.
Same for 3D or target. I am a recurve and flatbow shooter not a Traditional archer and I get offended being classed as such.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

Warbow said:


> Why? Frankly the FITA folks are much less prone buy 50# bows as starter bows--they are interested in precision archery and less subject to what seems me to be "macho bow advice syndrome". (Not that _some_ people can't handle 50# starter bows, Black Wolf :wink: )


Exactly my point. Nobody on the trad bowhunter forum would ask that question either. Maybe whether a 30lb bow would be heavy enough for squirrels or not, would be appropriate.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Bigjono said:


> There is still this fixation on using the term Traditional. Apart from using a recurve or longbow, what changes you from being a bowhunter into a "Traditional" bowhunter.
> Same for 3D or target. I am a recurve and flatbow shooter not a Traditional archer and I get offended being classed as such.


Why don't you head over to the Bowhunting section for a bit and then come back and ask that again. As for you being offended by being called traditional, I don't know what to say... Xanax maybe? I call myself a traditional style... I could call myself a stickbow, a boardbow, a guava stick bowhunter.... but I don't want to be learning about compounds, wheels, and sights, and a host of other threads to come to maybe one that refers to a takedown recurve shooting in brush.


----------



## Yewselfbow (Jan 28, 2006)

I voted Yes, not because I'm first and foremost a target archer, but because as I mentioned in the other thread, I believe (and It's just my opinion) that bow hunting is an archery discipline in it's own right with it's own techniques and methods and it deserves it's own arena for discussion.


----------



## mcharles (Nov 11, 2009)

rattus58 said:


> Why don't you head over to the Bowhunting section for a bit and then come back and ask that again. As for you being offended by being called traditional, I don't know what to say... Xanax maybe? I call myself a traditional style... I could call myself a stickbow, a boardbow, a guava stick bowhunter.... but I don't want to be learning about compounds, wheels, and sights, and a host of other threads to come to maybe one that refers to a takedown recurve shooting in brush.


Yeah, lots different there...
Post at top of page

_Rage input

Thinking about new broad heads for deer this fall. Rage seems to be popular, any insight from those that use them?
Thanks,
Herring _

Perhaps an Old Farts over 60 subsection?


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

mcharles said:


> Yeah, lots different there...
> Post at top of page
> 
> _Rage input
> ...


 and your rage question.... strictly a bowhunting question... in my opinion anyways... :grin: And old farts?.... that depends...


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

mcharles said:


> Yeah, lots different there...
> Post at top of page
> 
> _Rage input
> ...


I don't quite make the minimum age, but probably have the right attitude...:archer:


----------



## Live In a Park (Apr 1, 2012)

Matt_Potter said:


> What we really need is a bickering forum - if you are looking for a fight go post up and have it out - we could have sub forums for Instinctive bickering and Target vs. Hunting Bickering.
> 
> Matt


Bravo!


----------



## rambo-yambo (Aug 12, 2008)

I vote yes. It is easier for a traditional target archer (NON Hunter) to look through posting without having to look over a bunch of hunting related (eg. broad head) posts. For traditional hunter, everything is interesting. For a non hunter, hunting related subject might be of no interested to him or her.


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

Bickering forum, superb Matt but is that for traditional or non traditional bickering


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

But will it be all Traditional Bickering? Because we know that only started in the 80s.

Everyone knows the true Trad is English Long Bickering.
Can I do any Bare Bickering?

-Grant


----------



## MrSinister (Jan 23, 2003)

Voted no yet again. No sense in dividing one's self out of existence. Also much to learn from both. I know I shoot 3D and hunt. I enjoy both and feel they are very related to each other.


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

GEREP said:


> As to having your ID shown, it doesn't bother me in the least. I wouldn't say anything on here that I wouldn't say to a person's face. Having said that, a lot of people will gladly vote if their vote is kept private. After all, that's the American way. Many people don't particularly want to be attacked or looked at differently (and they will be, just look at the responses on the other poll), simply because they voted a certain way on one particular issue. That's human nature too.
> 
> KPC





WindWalker said:


> The members of any group in which their vote affects the rights of others is always open and a matter of record _e.g., Federal and State House and Senate, POTUS, city councils, county boards, school boards, etc, etc._
> 
> In this matter, knowing the archery background and primary archery interest of those who voted “no” is not for the purpose of finger-pointing or to incite animosity. Rather, being that the original poll is apparently to be somewhat germane in AT’s decision as to whether a “Traditional Bowhunting” forum will be created, it is only fair to those that are primarily bowhunters and do want a traditional bowhunting forum that it be known how many members that vote “no” are not bowhunters or seldom bowhunt.
> 
> ...





rattus58 said:


> Not true... what are you afraid of anyway? Show me right now one single thread over the first several pages of posts regarding BOWHUNTING! You want to talk about shooting, equipment, targets, etc, have little to do with Bowhunting in the manner that I WANT TO DISCUSS BOWHUNTING... It would be nice to be able to click on a traditional archery sub forum dedicated to JUST BOWHUNTING... and the debates would most certainly NOT be discussed on both. You're not going to be discussing gap/split on bowhunting. Instead, it would be shoot high, under or through brush.


You both have illustrated my point better than I ever could. The reason why a lot of people don't like their ID's shown in a poll is because people like yourself tend to single them out, and publicly disagree with them. I don't happen to mind, but many people simply don't like the confrontation. You've done it a number of times each, on this thread alone.

WindWalker:

As to your assertion that people's votes for the offices that you mentioned are a matter of public record. Since when? The results are obviously public, and even *that* a person voted, but *how* an individual votes is private. The only way it becomes public is if the voter chooses to tell someone.

KPC


----------



## Chris Segina (May 2, 2012)

voted no for the same reasons as stated in the other poll. Primary interest is bowhunting but some of these target tips have really helped me out.

chris


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

GEREP said:


> You both have illustrated my point better than I ever could. The reason why a lot of people don't like their ID's shown in a poll is because people like yourself tend to single them out, and publicly disagree with them. I don't happen to mind, but many people simply don't like the confrontation. You've done it a number of times each, on this thread alone.
> 
> WindWalker:
> 
> ...


Tend to single people out? How so. Disagree? I don't disagree... I have my preferences. I have my own selfish motives, as it seems you and others do to. I just don't see the benefits of being exclusionary, so maybe for a change YOU would be kind enough to expound on them exclusionary benefits in the Traditional Archery Section. And I'm a big boy, so if you can show me how I singled you out for particular disagreement, I'd be happy to discuss it with you and if you were offended in some way, show me and I'll apologize.


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

rattus58 said:


> Tend to single people out? How so. Disagree? I don't disagree... I have my preferences. I have my own selfish motives, as it seems you and others do to. I just don't see the benefits of being exclusionary, so maybe for a change YOU would be kind enough to expound on them exclusionary benefits in the Traditional Archery Section. And I'm a big boy, so if you can show me how I singled you out for particular disagreement, I'd be happy to discuss it with you and if you were offended in some way, show me and I'll apologize.


You're disagreeing with what I posted right now. You singled me out by quoting me.

You disagreed with my first post by saying "Not true..."

As to your offer of a discussion if I was offended, apparently you missed the part where I stated:
*
" I don't happen to mind, but many people simply don't like the confrontation. You've done it a number of times each, on this thread alone."

*I'll repeat, the back and forth doesn't bother me in the least. I was simply illustrating why some people would choose not to vote, if their votes are public knowledge, and you've only confirmed my theory.

I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm just saying it is, and that's why the participation may not be as high as it would be in a poll that is anonymous.

KPC


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Sanford said:


> But, rattus, you still seem to participate in about everything here, anyways. So, I don't think you have had to wade through, maybe got yourself stuck in, but not having to wade though. Wade through would imply avoidance of. If the other conversations are the only game in town, just start starting some you like. If you prefer non-sighted, non-shooting style, non-equipment type posts, start a few and get a feel for what attention they garner. If they are truly deserving of their own private filter, that should become apparent. Thread topics getting lost in others is not the same as getting pushed out. It's just low participation in topic starts and low response to keep em bumped up.


 Look at exactly what I participate in. It's one of a 100 threads. And if its not bowhunting and I want to interject, I will... but I prefer bowhunting and to another degree, bow building and arrow building... all related to my hunting. I'm not an expert at anything, and when it comes to targets, 3D, and other things, I've not comment, but 3D might have an application that I'd respond to in a hunting section, because it would be a hunting question... I don't even look at them here. I tend to keep my opinions my opinions, but every once in a while, I have something to contribute... and they usually can be related to bowhunting... though not that Im keeping any kind of score... :grin:


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

GEREP said:


> You're disagreeing with what I posted right now. You singled me out by quoting me.
> 
> You disagreed with my first post by saying "Not true..."
> 
> ...


Quoting you is singling you out??? If you make a comment, or if I make a comment, its nice to have something solid to respond to. I guess that I understand that people don't like to debate or get into debait, like happens here sometimes, and I have a tendency to be passionate about my selfish endeavors. The problem with me though, is that I do look at both sides if they are presented. 

The EXCLUSIONARY part hasn't been adequately explained or I'm too slow to catch it, so I keep presenting my opinions... and you do know that all of my stuff is MY OPINION... That means that you have YOUR OPINION and could be righter than me, or not... and my pappy used to say to me about darting into the street even if on a cross walk... that there is right.... crosswalk... and dead right.... flat right in the middle of the cross walk. :grin:


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

GEREP said:


> You're disagreeing with what I posted right now. You singled me out by quoting me.
> 
> You disagreed with my first post by saying *"Not true..."*
> As to your offer of a discussion if I was offended, apparently you missed the part where I stated:
> ...


You're right! I did. I meant not to say that actually and didn't get back to fix it.


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

rattus58 said:


> The EXCLUSIONARY part hasn't been adequately explained or I'm too slow to catch it...


I'm not sure exactly what you are getting at. I don't see where a thread that encompasses all aspects of "traditional archery" would be "EXCLUSIONARY." On the contrary, it wouldn't be exclusionary unless and until you eliminate certain discussions. Seperating hunting from target would be the exclusionary thing to do. 

As to the singling people out thing. How about the fact that when one person stated his opinion, you suggested he might need to be on Xanax?

:wink:



KPC


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

GEREP said:


> I'm not sure exactly what you are getting at. I don't see where a thread that encompasses all aspects of "traditional archery" would be "EXCLUSIONARY." On the contrary, it wouldn't be exclusionary unless and until you eliminate certain discussions. Seperating hunting from target would be the exclusionary thing to do.
> 
> As to the singling people out thing. How about the fact that when one person stated his opinion, you suggested he might need to be on Xanax?
> 
> ...


Oh good grief.... I didn't make fun of his opinion, I made light of his being *offended* I think he said at being called "traditional" :grin:


----------



## fyrmann254 (Sep 13, 2008)

voted no again


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

GEREP said:


> How about the fact that when one person stated his opinion, you suggested he might need to be on Xanax?
> 
> :wink:
> 
> ...


Which, frankly, could get him banned from other forums. I made joke in a similar fashion in the FITA forum. At the time I thought I was making an excellent point and being oh so very clever (as I always do :tongue: ). I got an immediate infraction. And you know what, I don't do that anymore. But I try to learn from what the mods tell me, and I try to keep with the culture of individual forums. And anyone can't do that, including me, they deserve to get bounced.


----------



## gnome (Oct 22, 2006)

Matt_Potter said:


> What we really need is a bickering forum - if you are looking for a fight go post up and have it out - we could have sub forums for Instinctive bickering and Target vs. Hunting Bickering.
> 
> Matt


:icon_1_lol: The Pirates have "The Dead Chicken" form........... maybe we could have "The Dead Horse Corral" ........The Pixie dust posse vs. the vegetarian gang :set1_rolf2:

If forced to make a choice......I vote NO........ I want the form to stay like it is now......I can ask a general archery or hunting or target or 3D question and get input from some VERY knowledgeable people, with VERY different OPINIONS , and that is exactly what makes this form so compelling !!! Most of us here are members of multiple other forms, and even other boards (pirates, leather wall,tradgang,and a few more) but we call this form our home. If the OP requests only hunting answers, maybe we should just respect that, and not hijack the thread.......


----------



## martha j (May 11, 2009)

why not have seperate forum for recurve---longbows. 
carbon----aluminum-----wood.
takedown------one piece.
3 under-------split finger.
it all boils down to shooting a stick with a string, hunting or target, vertical or cant, it still shooting & tuning for the same outcome.
why do we have to pick the fly specks out of the damn pepper?????????????????


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

martha j said:


> why not have seperate forum for recurve---longbows.
> carbon----aluminum-----wood.
> takedown------one piece.
> 3 under-------split finger.
> ...


Really? Then why so many forums here on Arhery Talk? Why one for FITA, one for Bowhunting, one for kids, one for .... and the list goes on. Traditional Archery is just one of those numerous interests. And that is exactly the reason to have a Bowhunting section INCLUDED with the Traditional Archery Forum so that one doesn't have to LOOK FOR A SPECK on flypaper to assuage one's interest. And as has been pointed out by several, who have said if you don't find it here go somewhere else, that is exactly the point... Be INCLUSIVE, don't suggest that those interested in traditional bowhunting go somewhere else for their interests.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Warbow said:


> Which, frankly, could get him banned from other forums. I made joke in a similar fashion in the FITA forum. At the time I thought I was making an excellent point and being oh so very clever (as I always do :tongue: ). I got an immediate infraction. And you know what, I don't do that anymore. But I try to learn from what the mods tell me, and I try to keep with the culture of individual forums. And anyone can't do that, including me, they deserve to get bounced.


Yeah... but context is everything though isn't it Warbow.....


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

rattus58 said:


> Yeah... but context is everything though isn't it Warbow.....


I dunno. I'm gonna take a Xanax and think on it...


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Warbow said:


> I dunno. I'm gonna take a Xanax and think on it...


Hahaha.... what do you think of including a traditional bowhunting sub-forum such as PRM for those interested in mostly or *only* bowhunting?


----------



## jcs-bowhunter (Jul 7, 2007)

As I stated in the other thread I would be fine switching between 2 sub forums beneath the Traditional forum. Leaving it "as is" works too. Change is not always a bad thing.


----------



## c-lo (Jan 8, 2012)

I like the mix and information I pick up on this forum, you often don't know what you'll find in a post, I like the variety within the tradtional archery envelope. So my vote is to keep it the same.


----------



## onlyaspike (Apr 16, 2007)

I dont believe there is a need to seperate hunters and target archers into two sperate forums....ALOT of the topics and info supplied can be utilized by both groups. I just don't see the need for any more seperation than there already is....just my OPINION.


----------



## OakKing (Apr 14, 2012)

BowmanJay said:


> There should be no seperation, the very things we discuss here apply to all who shoot target or hunting. I dont know why people think they dont?


This.


----------



## Fl archer (Jul 1, 2006)

shooting a bow well starts with a good foundation of basic skills. Learn the basic science of archery well and then expand those skills into hunting. I purchased my first hunting bow in the late 1960s and had some success up into the 80s. I took a state archery course for a hunter certificatiion in the late 80s. All and all , I believe reading AT has filled in a lot of blanks of tons of stuff I really didn't know. There is a lot of good helpful information on here from both sides of the fence. I would like to see it stay as one.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

rattus58 said:


> Hahaha.... what do you think of including a traditional bowhunting sub-forum such as PRM for those interested in mostly or *only* bowhunting?



So here's my suggestion. GO START A HUNTING THREAD. Right now,even if it is July and noone thinking about it right now. Get the fire going and lets see how many show up to chew the fat and tell old hunting stories or dream of fall while wiping the sweat out of their eyes.
Go ahead rat, we're waiting for you bud.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

rattus58 said:


> Hahaha.... what do you think of including a traditional bowhunting sub-forum such as PRM for those interested in mostly or *only* bowhunting?


I think the forum is small enough as it is. But I don't rule out the idea, either.


----------



## WindWalker (Jan 23, 2005)

> Right now,even if it is July _and noone thinking about it right now_


Someone does not bowhunt or bowhunt much? I started preparing in the middle of June and am waiting for the heat wave to break so that I can go prep my locations in 2 different hunting locations. 

Your asinine and belittling comments and challenge directed at Rat-Man is the kind of crap you are famous for. In fact, if one was to peruse many of your posts I believe they would find that you constantly follow the same theme and contribute little that I would consider constructive.


----------



## martha j (May 11, 2009)

rattus, can you not tell i'm trying to be facetious?
no i don't think we need to seperate anything that has to do with traditional shooting no matter the target.
takes tuning & work to hit the desired target.


----------



## Destroyer (Sep 11, 2009)

Warbow said:


> I think the forum is small enough as it is.


I think dividing up the forum will grow both hunting AND target. Hunters can post in the target section *if they want to* the same as the target guys. The difference being no one style rules the other, and newcomers can get a different perspective from either side.

And I think its a separate issue to 'fixing' those who cause the trouble even though splitting the forums might help with that as well.


----------



## toxophilite #1 (Jun 25, 2012)

the anti's are doing everything they can to stop us so lets not drive our own wedge in for them,we must stay united


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

martha j said:


> rattus, can you not tell i'm trying to be facetious?
> no i don't think we need to seperate anything that has to do with traditional shooting no matter the target.
> takes tuning & work to hit the desired target.


It is hard for me to know what people are thinking. You're young, energetic, and thoughtful. I'm old, got married with an obey clause in my contract, and love to hunt... mostly, some says, cuz I try to get away from the obey parts... Others sayed I got that wrong too...

I certainly don't disagree with you that it takes tuning, work and practice to hit a target. But I don't care about that stuff and if I want to read about 3 under with two nocks or whatnot, I'll look at it. I'm more interested in stalking techingues, stories, camo, broadheads, funneling techniques, glassing, and though you can put all of those within any traditional forum, for me, who doesn't care for ANY of the other stuff on a weighted scale... and for me, I'd prefer if we had a bowhunting only section so that I could come to my interests, such as say *archery talk women*, for exame... :grin: but then there are FITA, Field Archery, 3D Archery, Arrows and Strings, Bow tuning, and the list goes on... :grin:

Aloha... :beer:


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

toxophilite #1 said:


> the anti's are doing everything they can to stop us so lets not drive our own wedge in for them,we must stay united


 Tell me again how Traditional Bowhunting sub-forum divides us again? Some of you folks telling us to go to other sites is what is divisive.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

WindWalker said:


> Someone does not bowhunt or bowhunt much? I started preparing in the middle of June and am waiting for the heat wave to break so that I can go prep my locations in 2 different hunting locations.
> 
> Your asinine and belittling comments and challenge directed at Rat-Man is the kind of crap you are famous for. In fact, if one was to peruse many of your posts I believe they would find that you constantly follow the same theme and contribute little that I would consider constructive.



I'm sorry that you took the post to be asinine and belittleing. It certainly was not meant that way. I had thought about doing it myself but couldn't come up with anything that I thought others might find interesting. I have seen threads that you started along that line before. Maybe you are the perfect person to start one now. I'm just curious to see how much action the thread would see and it might help to shed some light on the topic at hand here.

But I won't hold my breath while waiting. I voted no both times but I'm beginning to think that I made a mistake.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

FORESTGUMP said:


> So here's my suggestion. GO START A HUNTING THREAD. Right now,even if it is July and noone thinking about it right now. Get the fire going and lets see how many show up to chew the fat and tell old hunting stories or dream of fall while wiping the sweat out of their eyes.
> Go ahead rat, we're waiting for you bud.


Yeah... you're probably right, no one here would be going hunting with a Bow anywhere in America... but it does cause me to wonder how all the hunting shows on the outdoor channel keep sponsors in July.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

rattus58 said:


> Yeah... you're probably right, no one here would be going hunting with a Bow anywhere in America... but it does cause me to wonder how all the hunting shows on the outdoor channel keep sponsors in July.



Good point that I have not given any thought to. I don't watch hunting shows very much. 
I hope you did not see my post above as negatively as windwalker did because I did not mean it the way he twisted it. I do however think that right now might be a good time to at least test the waters in that area. IF so many people are really longing to discuss hunting then the best way is to start a thread and go for it. I think that's called 'put up or shut up'. Now,if noone does so,,,, oh well, still waiting.


----------



## Destroyer (Sep 11, 2009)

rattus58 said:


> Some of you folks telling us to go to other sites is what is divisive.


Yep.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Good point that I have not given any thought to. I don't watch hunting shows very much.
> I hope you did not see my post above as negatively as windwalker did because I did not mean it the way he twisted it. I do however think that right now might be a good time to at least test the waters in that area. IF so many people are really longing to discuss hunting then the best way is to start a thread and go for it. I think that's called 'put up or shut up'. Now,if noone does so,,,, oh well, still waiting.


 Forest, I respect your posts. It is not the point of so many people wanting to discuss hunting, they do that already on AT and in this forum. It is cataloguing hunting... bowhunting specifically, in one place. The interest is already here, and dozens of posts have indicated that fact, and it IS that fact that prompts ME to encourage a bowhunting only sub-forum for Tradtional Archers so that I don't have to wander through 14 pages of topic to get to a bowhunting thread.

Much Aloha... :beer:


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Good point that I have not given any thought to. I don't watch hunting shows very much.
> I hope you did not see my post above as negatively as windwalker did because I did not mean it the way he twisted it. I do however think that right now might be a good time to at least test the waters in that area. IF so many people are really longing to discuss hunting then the best way is to start a thread and go for it. I think that's called 'put up or shut up'. Now,if noone does so,,,, oh well, still waiting.


I'll start one ...just as soon as the new subforum gets going ...:wink:

Mac


----------



## Destroyer (Sep 11, 2009)

MAC 11700 said:


> I'll start one ...just as soon as the new subforum gets going


:thumbs_up


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Destroyer said:


> :thumbs_up


I just noticed that there were 4600 views on this topic between the two threads in just 72 hours.... :grin:


----------



## Destroyer (Sep 11, 2009)

Plenty of interest I would say then...:wink:


----------



## CLASSICHUNTER (May 20, 2005)

I think a lot of us bow hunt and we use target shooting to hone our skills to a higher level .articles by jimmy blackman if spelt right on tuning your bow etc are a substantial benefit to any trad archer ..... hunter or target shooter.. I say keep it together and I personally can decide on what to read or not.. I voted no on first poll and undecided on second poll ..my vote is changed to a no ..


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

CLASSICHUNTER said:


> I think a lot of us bow hunt and we use target shooting to hone our skills to a higher level .articles by jimmy blackman if spelt right on tuning your bow etc are a substantial benefit to any trad archer ..... hunter or target shooter.. I say keep it together and I personally can decide on what to read or not.. I voted no on first poll and undecided on second poll ..my vote is changed to a no ..


Jimmy Blackmon has some great videos on bow making I know. I've seen a couple of shooting videos by him as well.... does he also make hunting videos ??? I'd love to see them... I know he likes to Rove and stump shoot... something I think for hunting is beneficial and in my case necessary for ranging my shots...


----------



## voodoofire1 (Jan 24, 2006)

I voted yes.....I've been a bowhunter all my life... because I wanted to be...........I've shot targets too...3D, because I had to......Target archery is not my cup of tea, I found it extremely boring and tedious.... kinda like watching paint dry.......I do get along with 3D though as to me it's an acceptable practice medium for what I truly enjoy.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Has a really hard time even relating to the above post by voodoo - I always think of Ken Beck's quote: "The disadvantage of traditional archery is that you have to shoot a lot of arrows to get good, the advantage of traditional archery is that you have to shoot a lot of arrows to get good" 

For me shooting my bow is never like watching paint dry - it is always fun - regardless of what I am shooting at - in fact - the time of year that I shoot my bow the least is during the bowhunting season - reason being - all of my free time is spent hunting - and we all know that when we are hunting - we are not shooting our bows - we spend 10000000% more time waiting to shoot than actually shooting when hunting.

If I felt shooting my bow other than when hunting was like watching paint dry - I would buy a compound and be like those guys who only take the bow out of the case a few days before season.

I am honestly shocked that there are even a small minority of traditional archers that feel this way - to me that is the whole cool thing about traditional archery...I thought, at least, that most traditional archers were into traditional archery becaues they loved shooting traditional bows - I guess I was wrong.

I love hunting and I love hunting with a traditional bow because I love shooting my traditional bow - i find, as Ken Beck says that it is an advantage of traditional archery that I have to shoot a lot of arrows to get good - instead of bowhunting being a few weeks or days a year like the rifle season is for me - bowhunting has become an all year long event - thanks to my love of traditional archery - and I will shoot at any target - be it 3D, paper, stumps, soda cans - whatever - and it is never like watching paint dry to me.

I feel that a lot of guys are really missing out on how much fun this great sport can be if you totally embrace it.


----------



## Lil Okie (Mar 25, 2008)

I voted yes..give it a try and see if it works

the sub-forum idea is a good one!:thumbs_up


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

I never understood why anyone would click on a thread title that obviously doesn't interest them. With very few exceptions, you can easily tell if a thread is about hunting, or if its about target shooting, or if it's a tech thread.

If a thread title goes something like *"How Do You Stringwalk?"*, there's a pretty good chance it's *not* about which broadheads are best for hunting hogs.

If a thread title goes something like *"What Broadheads Do You Use For Hogs?"*, there is a pretty good chance it's *not* about how to stringwalk.

Why can't people just click on the threads that interest them, and pass on the ones that obviously don't. Even if you are fooled by a title, you can always back out.

It's really not that hard, is it?

KPC


----------



## voodoofire1 (Jan 24, 2006)

Well Sharpy, while I do love shooting my stickbows, and even though I have my own 3-d course that has 30+ targets, I still find it boring at times, most of it is that I hate shooting alone, but put a fita target in front of me and you'll have to prod me to keep awake, I did it for hours upon hours as a kid and watched my father do it for many more hours than I did.....I was soooo Bored, and that boredom led me to hunting, something which my father only did with a gun......I'm 52, my father is 72, and just last sunday we finalized plans to go bowhunting together for the FIRST time...heck it will be his first ever bowhunt!.....and it took an act of god(cancer) to get it rolling......so say what you want, feel however you feel, but until you have walked in my shoes, don't judge me for my choices or opinions about it, I earned them fair and square.........Sharpy, I know we haven't gotten along much in the past, but if I could share a course with anyone on this site, it would be you, I highly respect your abilities and could probably learn a thing or two, but if you ever see me at a field archery course, please feel free to come over and wake me up.......


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

sharpbroadhead said:


> Has a really hard time even relating to the above post by voodoo - I always think of Ken Beck's quote: "The disadvantage of traditional archery is that you have to shoot a lot of arrows to get good, the advantage of traditional archery is that you have to shoot a lot of arrows to get good"
> 
> For me shooting my bow is never like watching paint dry - it is always fun - regardless of what I am shooting at - in fact - the time of year that I shoot my bow the least is during the bowhunting season - reason being - all of my free time is spent hunting - and we all know that when we are hunting - we are not shooting our bows - we spend 10000000% more time waiting to shoot than actually shooting when hunting.
> 
> ...


It's amazing what you can discover or re-discover about other people...when you allow yourself to realize...that we are all different...and have different perspectives and objectives as well as various needs wants & desires. It's a good thing Sharp...it really is..Welcome back to reality 101...:wink:

Mac


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Voodoo - read throught the posts in this thread and the other - these guys are including 3D shoots and shooting as "target shooting". Which to me is bizarre - as 3D is geared specifically toward bowhunting - and is likey the best practice any bowhunter can get.

Gerep - I agree 100% I don't even look at threads on Gap Shooting, Stringwalking etc... - let alone post in them - it is not my thing - so I don't bother with them - pretty simple.

This forum as it stands has all of it - from debates and discussions about broadheads and arrow weight (hunting specific, obviously) to the best possible form for the most accurate shot possible.


----------



## Arrowwood (Nov 16, 2010)

Sharp, the scoring rings on 3D targets give them away as being targets. Even the IBO, McKenzie and Rinehart call them targets. 3D_ is_ target archery. That's why a lot of people keep score shooting 3D.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Mac,

Out of curiosity what would you do with a guy who came into the bowhunter forum and asked about shooting style or aiming style? The only reasonable thing to do would seem to redirect him to the general forum, IOW, given our diversity, the general population seems his best answer. Now, if it's equipment choices, reviews, and discussions from everything from broadheads, stands, blinds, calls, methodology, etc... That seems reasonable.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

really? The scoring rings are a means of keeping track of progress - if you are shooting 5's all the time - that means you are wounding your prey - if you are shooting 8's and 10's you are bringing your prey home!

Obivously 3D is target archery - so is shooting stumps - stumps are a target - but since I don't hunt stumps and since stumps look nothing like the animals I hunt - I would much rather shoot at virtually exact representations of the animals I hunt - and yep - the score rings help me to determine if I am becoming a better shot


----------



## Arrowwood (Nov 16, 2010)

But there's more to it than recording your progress, because you turn your scores in. 

I don't hunt velociraptors, mosquitos, orange frogs or lions... it's a target archery game. And the rings aren't necessarily related to actual kill zones.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

So - what does turning in scores have to do with it - because I enjoy shooting with and against others - because the added pressure of knowing that people will see how I score helps me to simulate the pressure of a big buck in my stand to some degree? 

So the logic is - if a guy just shoots at a target - but does not keep track of his progress or turn in scores - he is ok and a true or real bowhunter - but if a guy is a bowhunter and keeps track of progress and turns in scores - he is somehow less of a bowhunter and more of a target shooter?

Maybe some of you guys should start your own little forum - because that logic is very different from mine and obviously the majority of this forum's members.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

GEREP said:


> I never understood why anyone would click on a thread title that obviously doesn't interest them. With very few exceptions, you can easily tell if a thread is about hunting, or if its about target shooting, or if it's a tech thread.
> 
> If a thread title goes something like *"How Do You Stringwalk?"*, there's a pretty good chance it's *not* about which broadheads are best for hunting hogs.
> 
> ...


Yeah, I think threads like that work just fine. It is more like when someone posts "What's the best way to learn archery--I have my dad's 65# bow?" or "I can hit any leaf at 30 yards, and I never practice because I'm a hunter and practice only makes you worse" kind of threads that the problems come up in, where there is an overlap of interest. Certainly not in the stalking threads or whatnot.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Arrowwood said:


> But there's more to it than recording your progress, because you turn your scores in.
> 
> I don't hunt velociraptors, mosquitos, orange frogs or lions... it's a target archery game. And the rings aren't necessarily related to actual kill zones.


No, but practicing hitting what you are aiming at in field conditions can only help your accuracy when hunting. How *do* you practice? Nothing is exactly like hunting, so all forms of practice will be different that hunting. So I'm not sure what your point is.


----------



## WindWalker (Jan 23, 2005)

Just a question:

When perusing the 3-D forum it appears that there are many recurve shooters posting and related discussions. If you 3-D trad shooters want to talk 3-D competition, and talk about 3-D leagues, scores, and who are the best shooters at certain events, why do you create these 3-D threads in the Traditional Forum when there is already a forum designated for 3-D?

I ask the same question of those that discuss other classifications of competitive target archery and applicable methods who also create threads here in the Traditional Archery forum. It appears that AT already has forums designated for every type of competitive target archery.


----------



## Arrowwood (Nov 16, 2010)

> these guys are including 3D shoots and shooting as "target shooting". Which to me is bizarre





> Obivously 3D is target archery





> So the logic is - if a guy just shoots at a target - but does not keep track of his progress or turn in scores - he is ok and a true or real bowhunter - but if a guy is a bowhunter and keeps track of progress and turns in scores - he is somehow less of a bowhunter and more of a target shooter?


Sharp, I guess I'm not interested anymore in what you think is "logic". No, I don't think turning in scores makes someone "somehow less of a bowhunter". It makes them a target archer in addition to being a bowhunter. A lot of people seem to be able to do both.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

What I see here is with some people who have stong opinions but are unwilling or incapable of trying to understand someone elses opinion and creating alot of this drama.

It really doesn't take much effort to try and understand others. All a person really needs to do is put their ego aside.

The fact is....any archer that is aiming at an object with the intensions of hitting it...is shooting at a target....therefore every archer is basically a target archer in the sense that we all shoot at targets.

The differences are usuually the circumstances in which we shoot at our targets.

Some circumstances involve shooting multiple arrows at a target from the same position and the same distance.

Other circumstances involve shooting only one arrow at a target and than moving on to the next target that may be a different size and distance than what the previous target was.

Just make more of an effort to try and understand one another and avoid making snide or disrespectful responses...and the problems here should be nearly eliminated for the most part.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Windy, there is also a bowhunting forum. If you post there and I post at the target forum, just what do we post here?

What seems to be the case here is that few want to create their own little Red October forum, where a few can decide what belongs and who belongs. Seems a vote of the population, even two, didn't appease them, didn't like the outcome, so let's just keep protesting.


----------



## Arrowwood (Nov 16, 2010)

Warbow said:


> No, but practicing hitting what you are aiming at in field conditions can only help your accuracy when hunting. How *do* you practice? Nothing is exactly like hunting, so all forms of practice will be different that hunting. So I'm not sure what your point is.


My point was 3D is target archery, whether Sharpbroadhead admits it in any given post or not. And I believe ALL forms of target archery will make anyone a better bowhunter. 

I shoot field, 3D, and indoor leagues in winter.

Warbow, was it you that had that hilarious post about 3D simulating actual hunting, having to drag the rubber deer through the woods, etc.?


----------



## WindWalker (Jan 23, 2005)

> Windy, there is also a bowhunting forum. If you post there and I post at the target forum, just what do we post here?


That is a question; not an answer.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Isn't any shooting not at a live animal target archery? 

Maybe we need "Formal Target", "Informal Target", "Long Range Target", Short Range Target", "Moving Target", "Aerial Target", "Stationary Target", "Starched Tighty ****** Target", "Commando Target", "Beer in Quiver Target", "Champagne and Caviar Target", "Don't Need No Stinkin' Target"...forums...:archer:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Easykeeper said:


> Isn't any shooting not at a live animal target archery?


Yes...and even a live animal can be a target :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## mrjeffro (Jul 25, 2007)

Being new to the Trad forum, is it allowed to post trad hunting kills or is that only designated to the bowhunting forum?


----------



## Dewey3 (May 6, 2012)

Well, there is a trad bowhunter question on the forum right now, so all you bowhunters jump on in !!! 

So far, it's only the "No" voters that have tried to answer the OP's questions ....


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

sharpbroadhead said:


> really? The scoring rings are a means of keeping track of progress - if you are shooting 5's all the time - that means you are wounding your prey - if you are shooting 8's and 10's you are bringing your prey home!
> 
> Obivously 3D is target archery - so is shooting stumps - stumps are a target - but since I don't hunt stumps and since stumps look nothing like the animals I hunt - I would much rather shoot at virtually exact representations of the animals I hunt - and yep - the score rings help me to determine if I am becoming a better shot


Stumpshooting/roving have for me the advantage of helping me range my shots, one, and two, your target can be as big or as small as your choose. While hunting, it helps me a lot, actually and mostly every animal I've killed in the last 10 years or so, came about from roving while hunting.... putting me in position to see and then stalk quietly. I'm sure its cost me a couple now and then too... but hey... that's hunting... :grin:

What I see here is accomodation, or I should say, lack of accomodation. I relate it to someone coming to your Funeral Home wanting a hermetically sealed bronze casket and after being asked for them two or three times still telling people to go somewhere else. You've got a casket, just not the one they want... and tough if they don't like it.... go somewhere else.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

mrjeffro said:


> Being new to the Trad forum, is it allowed to post trad hunting kills or is that only designated to the bowhunting forum?


Hey, at the top of this forum, in the "sticky" section, there is a forum to post pictures, stories, and such. They can and do get posted here in those forum with no problem.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Arrowwood said:


> My point was 3D is target archery, whether Sharpbroadhead admits it in any given post or not. And I believe ALL forms of target archery will make anyone a better bowhunter.


Sorry, I misunderstood your post. There is so much stuff flying in this thread it is hard to keep track of which is which. I like BW's comments--it is all target archery, we just shoot different targets under different circumstances.



Arrowwood said:


> Warbow, was it you that had that hilarious post about 3D simulating actual hunting, having to drag the rubber deer through the woods, etc.?


:embara: Well, that and and you only get to shoot one arrow the entire shoot. :tongue:

I think some folks don't get that if we make 3D too much like hunting they'll never get any shooting in. That's why we do other forms of archery--so we can shoot some arrows for practice.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Sanford said:


> Windy, there is also a bowhunting forum. If you post there and I post at the target forum, just what do we post here?
> 
> What seems to be the case here is that few want to create their own little Red October forum, where a few can decide what belongs and who belongs. *Seems a vote of the population, even two, didn't appease them, didn't like the outcome, so let's just keep protesting*.


It is amazing that you see it that way... and I don't understand it. Maybe you could expound on it with more detail. If you are in a Traditional Archery Forum with a Bowhunting section, meaning related to bowhunting with traditional equipment, how is that being exclusionary and *how is that deciding who and what belongs?*. I look at this as inclusion versus exclusion.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Rattus, would it not be easier and less divisive to say how does having a Trad forum exclude anyone? Bowhunting with traditional equipment is fine, but what is that in a difference to shooting a bow? I'm sure someone would say Fred Bear defined it. Someone might say Rod Jenkins defined it. Howard Hill? Rick Welch? Me? You?

The peripheral equipment issues really seems no problem to separate. Some stuff is pretty much all hunting use only. That's not the genesis of this move, though. It was over a discussion on Fred Bear, or, the supposition that there is a traditional bowhunting way to shoot a bow. If that could be defined, it might help.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Sanford said:


> Rattus, would it not be easier and less divisive to say how does having a Trad forum exclude anyone? Bowhunting with traditional equipment is fine, but what is that in a difference to shooting a bow? I'm sure someone would say Fred Bear defined it. Someone might say Rod Jenkins defined it. Howard Hill? Rick Welch? Me? You?
> 
> The peripheral equipment issues really seems no problem to separate. Some stuff is pretty much all hunting use only. That's not the genesis of this move, though. It was over a discussion on Fred Bear, or, the supposition that there is a traditional bowhunting way to shoot a bow. If that could be defined, it might help.


 I'm getting to the point of moving on with this. What you are offering is ghoulash when all I want is peas.


----------



## WindWalker (Jan 23, 2005)

Some members have requested an additional forum category be added to the Traditional Forum simply for the purpose of grouping threads and discussions that are mainly bowhunting related and to have better control over the hijacking of threads that commonly occurs when the targeteers and techy-talkers take over.

The supporting reasons and complaints by those that are for having a forum that is dedicated mostly to bowhunting have been frank but not unreasonably demeaning. However, some who are against having a forum that is principally for the purpose of bowhunting discussions have repeatedly engaged in the following type of unnecessary and false crap. 



> _Maybe we need "Formal Target", "Informal Target", "Long Range Target", Short Range Target", "Moving Target", "Aerial Target", "Stationary Target", "Starched Tighty ****** Target", "Commando Target", "Beer in Quiver Target", "Champagne and Caviar Target", "Don't Need No Stinkin' Target"...forums..._





> What seems to be the case here is that few want to create their own little *Red October f*orum, where a few can decide what belongs and who belongs.


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

Sanford said:


> Rattus, would it not be easier and less divisive to say how does having a Trad forum exclude anyone? Bowhunting with traditional equipment is fine, but what is that in a difference to shooting a bow? I'm sure someone would say Fred Bear defined it. Someone might say Rod Jenkins defined it. Howard Hill? Rick Welch? Me? You?
> 
> The peripheral equipment issues really seems no problem to separate. Some stuff is pretty much all hunting use only. That's not the genesis of this move, though. *It was over a discussion on Fred Bear, or, the supposition that there is a traditional bowhunting way to shoot a bow.* If that could be defined, it might help.


Your assumptions are not entirely correct. I have posted why I want a traditional bow hunting forum before..and as well in PM's to our moderator. I have given my thoughts and reasons to both..and while a discussion of Fred Bears shooting abilities were questioned and erroneously categorized on a open thread..that fact is not the only reason for my reasons of discussions with the moderator in trying to see if a bow hunting sub-forum can be allowed. Do not try to minimize mine and others wishes for this to happen...Our contention is Target archery and Bow Hunting are 2 totally separate disciplines each requiring differences in doing well and both are worthy enough to have their own respected forums to discuss in detail without 1 intruding on the other...Some like yourself contend this isn't needed..but that doesn't change the fact that over 30% of the folks here feel the same as I do and would like to see this happen. Most of us wanting this new sub-forum understand all aspects of how to shoot a bow can be utilized in hunting...but some who only feel 1 way...don't...and won't accept this fact and continue arguing against it in the manner they are presently doing on both threads about it.

Mac


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Mac, my point is, the "our" contention, based on two polls, polls where pure target archers at best make up 15% of the posters here, is in favor of them both being together. That's between basically all bowhunter's, not target archers v. bowhunters. The "our" contention you speak of is the minority even among bowhunters.

If you feel 30% of the voice is being lost, it might be just that, it's lost to the majority of bowhunters out there as well as target shooters. Guess what, it will still be lost in a bowhunting forum unless someone gets to define what others say.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Sanford said:


> Mac, my point is, the "our" contention, based on two polls, polls where pure target archers at best make up 15% of the posters here, is in favor of them both being together. That's between basically all bowhunter's, not target archers v. bowhunters. The "our" contention you speak of is the minority even among bowhunters.
> 
> If you feel 30% of the voice is being lost, it might be just that, it's lost to the majority of bowhunters out there as well as target shooters. Guess what, it will still be lost in a bowhunting forum unless someone gets to define what others say.


You haven't cogently explained how they would not be together with a bowhunting sub-section of Tradtional Archery. For someone to click on a subforum looking for strictly bowhunting threads is VASTLY different than trying to wade through the dozens of threads looking for bowhunting applications, comments, and threads.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

This is funny - everyone has spent several days and lots of posts debating if we need a specific hunting forum - but nobody is talking about hunting - LOL 

This horse is dead in my book


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Rattus, yes, all bowhunter's could be together, but they would still be as divided on opinion as they have been over these two threads. Many hunters are just not pinned to one mindset. Stuff that is considered target related to some, is integral to some hunters program. Brady Ellison is a good example of a country boy hunter turned Olympic archer. Don't you think he knows the crossover points and synergy of benefits to both aspects of archery?

See, the problem is that you cannot create a minority consensus in one community by carving it out of a majority and keep it pure without tight controls on who and what can be discussed in the new one. So far, all voting has been blind on that, what can be discussed.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

sharpbroadhead said:


> This is funny - everyone has spent several days and lots of posts debating if we need a specific hunting forum - but nobody is talking about hunting - LOL
> 
> This horse is dead in my book


So you're saying that AT is the wrong place for bowhunters?


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Sanford said:


> Rattus, yes, all bowhunter's could be together, but they would still be as divided on opinion as they have been over these two threads. Many hunters are just not pinned to one mindset. Stuff that is considered target related to some, is integral to some hunters program.
> 
> See, the problem is that you cannot create a minority consensus in one community by carving it out of a majority and keep it pure without tight controls on who and what can be discussed. So far, all voting has been blind on that, what can be discussed.


you all are trying to create consensus, I'm trying to create opportunity. Look forget it... I get it. You're fer the status quo.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Rattus, I am for whatever DoubleS says. My vote and opinion is only to the effect that two contentious forums solves nothing, if less bickering is the goal. A bowhunting forum makes sense as long as I, when I start hunting my selfbows, which I plan to, can share how my OLY form greatly improves my accuracy. My opinion will matter, as there is no defined bowhunting form, except what lives in a few minds. That's all.


----------



## 4nolz (Aug 17, 2011)

WindWalker said:


> posting a reason to support your vote is in no way mandatory, No posting of reason is required to support your vote.




yes


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

Sanford said:


> Mac, my point is, the "our" contention, based on two polls, polls where pure target archers at best make up 15% of the posters here, is in favor of them both being together. That's between basically all bowhunter's, not target archers v. bowhunters. The "our" contention you speak of is the minority even among bowhunters.
> 
> If you feel 30% of the voice is being lost, it might be just that, it's lost to the majority of bowhunters out there as well as target shooters. Guess what, it will still be lost in a bowhunting forum unless someone gets to define what others say.


And the way to define it is to allow those wanting a sub-forum to have it.

While I know full well many here do both..not all do..nor do they wish to. Those that do..will no matter if there is 1 forum 2 forums or even 3 forums. 

It is those who don't want a sub-forum that feels a need to define it as you are wanting. IMHO I feel those of us who want it..are trying to be silenced for even asking for a sub-forum...Remember what excuses against this has already been presented...

The Trad forum here will continue on regardless if it has a Bow Hunting sub-forum added or not...some here don't understand that...but I can safely say...IMHO...allowing it will bring in more people...just as having the discussion about it already has...and I base that on seeing the interest the topic has caused...

Mac


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Ok Ok...the way I see it....just give it to them.

It's really NOT that big of a deal from my perspective.

There's been a good number of people that actually want it and it's NOT like our forum is going to become soooo confusing on where to post because there is a new Trad Bowhunting subforum that is tied and connected to our current one.

If we find out it's doing more harm than good for some reason....just eliminate it and go back to the way things were.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Long Rifle (Dec 8, 2011)

I voted yes. Bowhunting encompasses more than just archery to me and I'd enjoy tips from more experienced bowhunters that would help in the field, ie, stand placement, treestand problems and solutions for bowhunters, etc..


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

MAC 11700 said:


> And the way to define it is to allow those wanting a sub-forum to have it.
> 
> While I know full well many here do both..not all do..nor do they wish to. Those that do..will no matter if there is 1 forum 2 forums or even 3 forums.
> 
> ...


5200 in just a little more than 72 hours... :grin:


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Ok Ok...the way I see it....just give it to them.
> 
> It's really NOT that big of a deal from my perspective.
> 
> ...


Sage.... :grin:


----------



## Dewey3 (May 6, 2012)

One problem I have with a separate forum is this:

A newbee _*bowhunting question*_ was asked this morning about 10 AM.

Of the "Yes" group, only Rat bothered to give him an answer, even though lots of the "Yes" crowd were here battling on with the poll "discussions".

On the other hand, several of the "No" crowd tried to answer his questions.

Is this the way newbees will be treated on this new bowhunting forum ?


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

sharpbroadhead said:


> This is funny - everyone has spent several days and lots of posts debating if we need a specific hunting forum - but nobody is talking about hunting - LOL
> 
> This horse is dead in my book


I just happened to see a post by someone who specifically asked a bowhunting question... and you the bowhunter, weren't one of the respondants... what does that mean... you didn't see it because it was buried in dozens of others, where you might have seen it in a bowhunting sub-forum, or you're not interested to talk bowhunting with a young bowhunter?


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

WindWalker said:


> Some members have requested an additional forum category be added to the Traditional Forum simply for the purpose of grouping threads and discussions that are mainly bowhunting related and to have better control over the hijacking of threads that commonly occurs when the targeteers and techy-talkers take over.
> 
> The supporting reasons and complaints by those that are for having a forum that is dedicated mostly to bowhunting have been frank but not unreasonably demeaning. However, some who are against having a forum that is principally for the purpose of bowhunting discussions have repeatedly engaged in the following type of unnecessary and false crap.
> 
> "_Maybe we need "Formal Target", "Informal Target", "Long Range Target", Short Range Target", "Moving Target", "Aerial Target", "Stationary Target", "Starched Tighty ****** Target", "Commando Target", "Beer in Quiver Target", "Champagne and Caviar Target", "Don't Need No Stinkin' Target"...forums..._"


WindWalker, if you will read what I have posted on these polls the last couple of days you will see that I voted "no" twice. I also posted that the easiest thing to do was to create another forum like the passionate minority is asking for. My post that you quoted was an attempt to add a bit of frivolity to a thread which is taking on a definite negative tone. Sorry I didn't make my point well or you didn't appreciate my "crap" that was nothing more than an attempt at light-hearted humor. Subtlety is often lost on the internet.

Like I said earlier in this thread even though I like things the way they are, the easiest compromise to create a new forum and see how it goes. I'd be in both the new and existing forum so ultimately it really doesn't matter to me.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

rattus - I have posted in numerous threads about hunting - I have posted videos about my experiences hunting, I have posted videos of testing I have done on hunting equipment such as broadheads and arrows, etc... Does that mean that I address every single post about hunting - nope - I may miss one or two - or I may feel that the answer I would have given has already been given.

I think a voted wrong - I should have voted yes - because the more I look at this thread and the other - I think a forum for these guys where they can all stay is a great idea - the rest of us who love every aspect of traditional archery, who hunt, who shoot targets, and who love to actually share information and help each other - rather than get dragged into argument after argument - can then be left alone in our forum.


----------



## Dewey3 (May 6, 2012)

sharpbroadhead said:


> rattus - I have posted in numerous threads about hunting - I have posted videos about my experiences hunting, I have posted videos of testing I have done on hunting equipment such as broadheads and arrows, etc... Does that mean that I address every single post about hunting - nope - I may miss one or two - or I may feel that the answer I would have given has already been given.
> 
> I think a voted wrong - I should have voted yes - because the more I look at this thread and the other - I think a forum for these guys where they can all stay is a great idea - the rest of us who love every aspect of traditional archery, who hunt, who shoot targets, and who love to actually share information and help each other - rather than get dragged into argument after argument - can then be left alone in our forum.



But will a newbee going there get help ???

Yes, Rat replied to the bowhunting question - but was the only "Yes" vote to do so (at this post time, at least).
The other responders were the "No" crowd.

Frankly, speaking as a relative newcomer, few of the "Yes" group bother to help newbees (Rat being a notable exception). And if they do, the OP topic is often hijacked into some of the same old arguments while the OP and his problem are forgotten.

That is my main concern about both the split and this forum in general.


----------



## mcharles (Nov 11, 2009)

"Can't we all just get along?" - Rodney King


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

A newbee will get more help from the forum as it is - he will get help from the best shots out there who are also bowhunters - these other guys who derail such threads will all be in the subforum.


----------



## Dewey3 (May 6, 2012)

sharpbroadhead said:


> A newbee will get more help from the forum as it is - he will get help from the best shots out there who are also bowhunters - these other guys who derail such threads will all be in the subforum.


Unless, of course, he only goes to the subforum, because he wants to be a "bowhunter" AND NEVER COMES HERE.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

that would be sad - btw - I was being sarcastic when I said I should have changed my vote


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

WindWalker said:


> Some members have requested an additional forum category be added to the Traditional Forum simply for the purpose of grouping threads and discussions that are mainly bowhunting related and *to have better control over the hijacking of threads that commonly occurs when the targeteers and techy-talkers take over.*
> 
> The supporting reasons and complaints by those that are for having a forum that is dedicated mostly to bowhunting have been frank but not unreasonably demeaning. However, some who are against having a forum that is principally for the purpose of bowhunting discussions have repeatedly engaged in the following type of unnecessary and false crap.


Bam!...i can't believe you said that out loud! :laugh: also loved MAC11700's comment regarding a bowhunting forum for those of us who know more than just one way to shoot a bow but...then who would all those "targeteers" have to talk down to?..but then we'd prolly get silly questions like...

"Okay...i'm 25' up a tree in a climbing tree stand on the side of a hill looking down into a thick bottom...i have survey tap at 20, 30 and 40yds for reference...there's a huge buck between the 20 & 30...i'm having to lean out, duck under a limb and cant my bow heavily to get the shot...what's my gap?...sent from my droid via tapatalk."

:sign10:


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Yep, Jinks, and what of those hunters using sight pins on their bows too (someone better let them know they were excluded in the Traditional Bowhunter definition). Yep, no rangefinders. No GPS. Yep, nothing but good old Fred Bear style.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

wow - please - give these guys their own forum - just one condition - if you give it to them they cannot be allowed to post with those of us who actually bowhunt and shoot at targets - put that up for a vote!


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

sharpbroadhead said:


> wow - please - give these guys their own forum - just one condition - *if you give it to them they cannot be allowed to post with those of us *who actually bowhunt and shoot at targets - put that up for a vote!


This is exactly what I would expect from *YOU* sharp...


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Rattus, that's exactly what Mac is saying. Our definition of a Traditional Hunter is to be decided. IOW, by my understanding, once settled, unless I am the same type trad hunter as the definition, or consensus, I will be out of line to post in the forum.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Sanford said:


> Rattus, that's exactly what Mac is saying. Our definition of a Traditional Hunter is to be decided. IOW, by my understanding, once settled, unless I am the same type trad hunter as the definition, or consensus, I will be out of line to post in the forum.


*IF*...that's the case...than I don't agree with it!

Everyone should be able to post anywhere they like as long as they have something to share that is NOT disrespectful or trying to cause problems and may actually help the OP.

Ray :shade:


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Sanford said:


> Yep, Jinks, and what of those hunters using sight pins on their bows too (someone better let them know they were excluded in the Traditional Bowhunter definition). Yep, no rangefinders. No GPS. Yep, nothing but good old Fred Bear style.


yep...and who knows...if we did have a traditional bowhunting forum?..we might even be able to actually define the word "traditional" again...with meaning and everything as...it seems we wrestle with that a bit here...and when i first showed up here?...i had my ideals of what trad bowhunting was and they were very defined...and boy did i get slammed for having those...and here i thought urban cowboys were bad...come to find out they don't have diddley on urban indians! :laugh:


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Ray, so far no one has upped and said if my definition of Traditional Hunter that will contain elements of my form will be acceptable. To date, the definition is painfully absent. It's kinda like we will read the bill and know what's in it after we vote or get it passed. After that, that is the definition of what a Traditional Hunter is, as endorsed by Archey Talk, of which we are all members.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

JINKSTER said:


> yep...:laugh:


At least you are the first to confirm it is going to more neo-trad.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Sanford said:


> Ray, so far no one has upped and said if my definition of Traditional Hunter that will contain elements of my form will be acceptable. To date, the definition is painfully absent. It's kinda like we will read the bill and know what's in it after we vote or get it passed. After that, that is the definition of what a Traditional Hunter is, as endorsed by Archey Talk, of which we are all members.


yep...can't wait to see the first dude with a luxor with a laser screwed in the stab hole while shooting real barred feathers..and a floppy hat! :laugh:

I digress...i'm throwing in the towel...i'm feeling like as soon as i start using the arrow as a conscious sighting system?...the magic is gone...and every ounce of fun factor has been sucked out of the equation...matter fact?...i haven't touched a bow in a couple days now...not that i haven't had the time or energy but...if i'm gonna do all that?...i might as well just grab the omen and strap on a release so...i have no clue where i'm at right now or what to think of what...alls i know is what usta be a ton of fun?...has come dangerously close to "work"...and if that's the case?...i'm out. L8R, Bill.


----------



## voodoofire1 (Jan 24, 2006)

Dewey3 said:


> One problem I have with a separate forum is this:
> 
> A newbee _*bowhunting question*_ was asked this morning about 10 AM.
> 
> ...


Umm.... never saw one at 10am, I did however see where one was started at 11:16 am entitled "traditional bowhunting question".....is that the one you are referring to?

Well, sorry I wasn't here as a "yes" man to address his question, but the internet and this site is not my whole life, I have one away from here that I enjoy very much, well most times anyway, take today for instance, I had to do something in person that was terrible hard to do... at 11:15, I was telling my mother that I have cancer.....and I would have rather ate glass...........and one other thing, you say only 1 "yes" man answered and the rest were "no" men,....and yes men being those wanting a bowhunting forum?..... um bowhunters...... who are use to getting and being outdoors, in the woods, on the lake, or in the yard shooting......and where were these "no" men..... on the computer?.........there's a whole lot more to killin than reading........


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Sanford said:


> Ray, so far no one has upped and said if my definition of Traditional Hunter that will contain elements of my form will be acceptable.


If my opinion counts for anything with the development of this new forum...let me be the first to say..."Heck yeah"! :wink: based on using a primitive bow shooting FITA style. It would be even more fun if you shared pics or video along with it! :thumbs_up

Ray :shade:


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Sanford said:


> Ray, so far no one has upped and said if my definition of Traditional Hunter that will contain elements of my form will be acceptable. To date, the definition is painfully absent. It's kinda like we will read the bill and know what's in it after we vote or get it passed. After that, that is the definition of what a Traditional Hunter is, as endorsed by Archey Talk, of which we are all members.


I'll throw out a defintion... in my OPINION... traditional Styles qualifies... essentially longbow, recurve and variants. But for me, would that preclude old bill from coming to a hunt with me shooting a compound, no, I'm not into an obamacare style rule or regulation... who are we here... are traditional style shooters or are we super hi tech compound shooters here? Most are desiring to share our lifestyles and attitudes, but are there compound shooters here that would enjoy a traditional style bowhunting sub-forum? I'm sure. 

Inclusion versus exclusion. Accomodation. Do you bowhunt with traditional style equipment... that would as would any equipment of anyone drawn to tradtional style archery, be my vision of who would post. Are you going to get others who post... I would hope so... if its related to traditonal style bowhunting.... or share common bowhunting challenge that we bowhunters find ourselves... like sneaking up a small band of sheep with a side quiver that you learn later on video, was waving back and forth like a turkey in heat as you snaked along on your belly....

It is interesting to see you contemplating restrictions and parameter rather than the joy of having a bowhunting sub-forum where predominantly bowhunting will be the topic...


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

JINKSTER said:


> yep...can't wait to see the first dude with a luxor with a laser screwed in the stab hole while shooting real barred feathers..and a floppy hat! :laugh:


Me too! :wink:



JINKSTER said:


> alls i know is what usta be a ton of fun?...has come dangerously close to "work"...and if that's the case?...i'm out. L8R, Bill.


It still should be fun!

If it's not you're not going about it the right way!

Just remember....no one is forcing you to shoot your bow one way or the other. If it's NOT fun for you anymore...you should understand that it's you who has made the choice/choices that doesn't make it fun for you anymore. No one should feel forced to shoot this or that bow or this or that way...unless it's related to competition.

Ray :shade:


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

JINKSTER said:


> yep...and who knows...if we did have a traditional bowhunting forum?..we might even be able to actually define the word "traditional" again...with meaning and everything as...it seems we wrestle with that a bit here...and when i first showed up here?...i had my ideals of what trad bowhunting was and they were very defined...and boy did i get slammed for having those...and here i thought urban cowboys were bad...come to find out they don't have diddley on urban indians! :laugh:


Take a minute to inhale JINKS, the fire that burns the hottest burns out quickest. 

Nobody here cares if you shoot 4 fingers over with a whisker biscuit and screw in stone points. It's your game, you can play it any way you want. When you ask for advice however, expect to get some...and don't complain if you don't like what you get. 

Rock on dude...

KPC


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Me too! :wink:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks Ray...and i think i just found out what my goals are and aren't...but it seems there's some hard fast rule that ya can't have fun and shoot well too...seems there's lotsa one or the other but not both mindsets.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

BLACK WOLF said:


> If my opinion counts for anything with the development of this new forum...let me be the first to say..."Heck yeah"! :wink: based on using a primitive bow shooting FITA style. It would be even more fun if you shared pics or video along with it! :thumbs_up
> 
> Ray :shade:


Ray, as a matter of fact, several weeks ago I purchased my first ever set of broadheads. Stained up 4 good wood shafts, and was getting ready to hog hunt with one of my backed selfbows. I wanted to also video some of the outcome to post on our local shop's website to one, help promote more primitive archery there and two, they post stuff like that weekly to add to their YouTube database. It drives web traffic and bumps their page listing on search engines. I wouldn't mind selling a few there 

My target bows never drove me to any interest in such, though I was at once an avid hunter for decades. My current interest is more sparked off these self bows, and, i can drill arrows at 15 yards shooting them the same as my other bows. Vids to come.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Rattus, no parameters for me. Full agreement with you. Only the ones who initiated this move know if any parameters, or suggested parameters, exist or are requested. They won't say.


----------



## martha j (May 11, 2009)

rattus called me a young thing, may god bless him for that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
but as a 65 year old i can set back with my bourbon & coke & get a chuckle out of this whole target verses hunting thing & see that it won't matter one way or the other. the peeing contest goes on no matter what, some use big words to try & muddy the waters while others use "exsperience" to further who is right. take a breath, take big drink of something stout & set back & enjoy the comeradomy of all stick shooters no matter what they shoot or how they shoot it & at what they shoot.
i'm sure somboby will find fault with what i just said , but in the words of old Rep "frankly my dear i don't give a---------------------------.


----------



## Dewey3 (May 6, 2012)

BLACK WOLF said:


> *IF*...that's the case...than I don't agree with it!
> 
> Everyone should be able to post anywhere they like as long as they have something to share that is NOT disrespectful or trying to cause problems and may actually help the OP.
> 
> Ray :shade:


Ray, my strong impression from reading Windwalker's and Mac's posts on this subject is that if I or someone would post there and suggest a 300 round to a newbee bowhunter as a way to show improvement of shooting skills, it would be considered "trying to cause problems" by the new rulers of the bowhunting fiefdom ... er... forum.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Sanford said:


> Rattus, no parameters for me. Full agreement with you. Only the ones who initiated this move know if any parameters, or suggested parameters, exist or are requested. They won't say.


:grin: then that should be our mission within the mission... you are hereby ordained... :grin:


----------



## Destroyer (Sep 11, 2009)

I change my vote to no, you people deserve each other. Later gaiters... :wave:


----------



## Dewey3 (May 6, 2012)

martha j said:


> rattus called me a young thing, may god bless him for that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> but as a 65 year old i can set back with my bourbon & coke & get a chuckle out of this whole target verses hunting thing & see that it won't matter one way or the other. the peeing contest goes on no matter what, some use big words to try & muddy the waters while others use "experience" to further who is right. take a breath, take big drink of something stout & set back & enjoy the comradery of all stick shooters no matter what they shoot or how they shoot it & at what they shoot.
> I'm sure somebody will find fault with what i just said , but in the words of old Rep "frankly my dear i don't give a---------------------------.


Wow, Martha, I hope I have that much wisdom when I am 65 ... but I have two more years to go, so am not there yet ! 

(I'm serious!)

(And having read TWO threads on this subject, the Jack and Coke are the best idea yet !!!)


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Destroyer said:


> I change my vote to no, you people deserve each other. Later gaiters... :wave:


That's two new votes to give these guys their own forum - just keep the stipulation that they have to stay there -


----------



## Dewey3 (May 6, 2012)

rattus58 said:


> :grin: then that should be our mission within the mission... you are hereby ordained... :grin:


So we call him "Father Sanford" now ???


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Dewey3 said:


> So we call him "Father Sanford" now ???


Oh good grief.... what I want... AND THIS IS PURELY SELFISH ON MY PART.... is a bowhunting forum using traditonal style equipment. I'm not really into 0bamacarelike/IRS book of rules, so that if Sharp wanted to post another hunt with his Rage broadheads, he'd be banned.... did he hunt with a recurve? That is the question... Do I feel its for discussing sights... no... nor gap shooting or a 300 round.... but does that mean if some kid asks if a 300 round would help getting ready for a bowhunt.... he should be excoriated for bringing target archery into the forum??? NO.

Geeeeeze.... lets keep this simple.


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

Traditional Bow HUNTING ...is about just that..Would I want to see the same type of target shooting post ..no..and that is my opinion. However ...as I said to sharp before ...it will be up to the admin and moderator what is and is not allowed ...just as it is on any forum here at AT

Mac


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Destroyer said:


> I change my vote to no, you people deserve each other. Later gaiters... :wave:


Made me laugh. thanks!


----------



## Dewey3 (May 6, 2012)

MAC 11700 said:


> Traditional Bow HUNTING ...is about just that..*Would I want to see the same type of target shooting post ..no.*.and that is my opinion. However ...as I said to sharp before ...it will be up to the admin and moderator what is and is not allowed ...just as it is on any forum here at AT
> 
> Mac


So you don't think that target shooting, say a 300 round, could ever help a newcomer to archery/bowhunting and would never recommend it to them on the new forum ???

If that is the case, THERE is my problem with the split (and it would be a split, IMHO) in a nutshell.


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

JINKSTER said:


> ...but it seems there's some hard fast rule that ya can't have fun and shoot well too...seems there's lotsa one or the other but not both mindsets.


Jinks - hitting what you are aiming at is fun but, I think you know that already

Matt


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

[*QUOTE=Destroyer;1064489525]I change my vote to no, you people deserve each other. QUOTE*]


I agree with Destroyer ...

this is the strangest thread I have seen I think ... I may be in the minority but if you don't like the content of a thread , don't read it or post in it ? Plenty of places all across the interwebs to find a niche that'll fit you ...
As primarily a bowhunter I have little in common with a 300 round thread ... much the same as I think my broadhead discussion would bore them silly but I'd hope that everyone could get along enough to keep one very small forum going without splitting it up because of the arguing ?
Ya think different sub forums are going to alleviate that ? 
Ya think people will stop hunting Sharp etc etc and sing Koombuy-yah in a bowhunting forum ? 
Not very likely ...
Ya think people will stop arguing about form, speed or equipment in a 'target' forum etc ?
Prolly not .....

wait til the bowhunting forum gets split up into ... fair chase vs High fenced ... trad vs modern trad ... wood vs carbon ad infinitum 

then we'll be cooking ......


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

benofthehood said:


> Destroyer said:
> 
> 
> > I change my vote to no, you people deserve each other. QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

benofthehood is spot on!


----------



## Destroyer (Sep 11, 2009)

BarneySlayer said:


> Made me laugh. thanks!


:thumbs_up


----------



## WindWalker (Jan 23, 2005)

> by _the new rulers of the bowhunting fiefdom ._.. er... forum.


How about knocking that crap off?


----------



## Dewey3 (May 6, 2012)

WindWalker said:


> How about knocking that crap off?


Ok.

Now how about answering my questions about newbee training on a possible Bowhunters forum, considering some will be beginning archers ???


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Dewey3 said:


> Ok.
> 
> Now how about answering my questions about newbee training on a possible Bowhunters forum, considering some will be beginning archers ???


I don't understand your question. Is he asking questions about bowhunting or is he asking about setting up his bow, target shooting, or what? I think its fairly straightforward, if its a bowhunting question, you'd ask it on the bowhunting sub-forum. If its about something else it would be best probably asked on the Traditional Archery forum. Doesn't that make sense?


----------



## MrSinister (Jan 23, 2003)

Now I think I see so many recurve questions popping up in the general section. No one wants to wade in here. It might rub off on them.


----------



## WindWalker (Jan 23, 2005)

> Now how about answering my questions about newbee training on a possible Bowhunters forum, considering some will be beginning archers ?


I don't quite understand.


----------



## Dewey3 (May 6, 2012)

rattus58 said:


> I don't understand your question. Is he asking questions about bowhunting or is he asking about setting up his bow, target shooting, or what? I think its fairly straightforward, if its a bowhunting question, you'd ask it on the bowhunting sub-forum. If its about something else it would be best probably asked on the Traditional Archery forum. Doesn't that make sense?


Take a beginning archer who wants to get a bow and bowhunt as his main purpose for getting into archery.
He comes to the bowhunt forum instead of this one, because that's what he wants to do - bowhunt.

So are you saying that he will be referred to this forum for bow selection and training information ?

Or not ??

If not, would any target training, say the 300 round as a measure of shooting improvement, be suggested ???

I guess I don't know what constitutes a "bowhunting question" for someone just starting out.

There seems to be too much overlap.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Dewey3 said:


> Ray, my strong impression from reading Windwalker's and Mac's posts on this subject is that if I or someone would post there and suggest a 300 round to a newbee bowhunter as a way to show improvement of shooting skills, it would be considered "trying to cause problems" by the new rulers of the bowhunting fiefdom ... er... forum.


If anyone thinks that your comment about 300 rounds would be considered 'trying to cause problems' needs to seriously look at why they would get sooo offended or outraged at such a comment.

Making a suggestion is one thing. Saying that all archers must or need to shoot 300 rounds no matter what their goals were...could than be viewed as trying to start something, IMO.

Ray :shade:


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Dewey3 said:


> Take a beginning archer who wants to get a bow and bowhunt as his main purpose for getting into archery.
> He comes to the bowhunt forum instead of this one, because that's what he wants to do - bowhunt.
> 
> So are you saying that he will be referred to this forum for bow selection and training information ?
> ...


Well here is an example... http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1785967 :grin:


----------



## Dewey3 (May 6, 2012)

BLACK WOLF said:


> If anyone thinks that your comment about 300 rounds would be considered 'trying to cause problems' needs to seriously look at why they would get sooo offended or outraged at such a comment.
> 
> Making a suggestion is one thing. Saying that all archers must or need to shoot 300 rounds no matter what their goals were...could than be viewed as trying to start something, IMO.
> 
> Ray :shade:



That criteria would be fine by me - but do Windwalker and Mac agree ???

Their post SEEM TO ME to suggest ANY talk about targets would be out-of-bounds on a hunters forum.
But maybe that is just the way their post hit me.


----------



## Palma (Feb 9, 2011)

I think it is easier as is, if I have to go to a seperate forum, I may not go. If I only want to talk to Trads, there is a place for that.:zip:


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Dewey3 said:


> That criteria would be fine by me - but do Windwalker and Mac agree ???
> 
> Their post SEEM TO ME to suggest ANY talk about targets would be out-of-bounds on a hunters forum.
> But maybe that is just the way their post hit me.


Windy probably does not get to say. If gap is not trad hunting, how could his sight qualify?


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Palma said:


> I think it is easier as is, if I have to go to a seperate forum, I may not go. If I only want to talk to Trads, there is a place for that.:zip:


 It woudl be a sub-forum to traditional archery.... you'd still be here, but the topics would be generally ONLY traditional_style bowhunting related.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Sanford said:


> Windy probably does not get to say. If gap is not trad hunting, how could his sight qualify?


*sigh*


----------



## WindWalker (Jan 23, 2005)

> _That criteria would be fine by me - but do Windwalker and Mac agree ???_


Neither Mac or I or anyone else other than the moderator is King of the hill.



> _If gap is not trad hunting,_


?


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

WindWalker said:


> ?


According to rattus and jinks. Split vision, too.


----------



## Dewey3 (May 6, 2012)

WindWalker said:


> Neither Mac or I or anyone else other than the moderator is King of the hill.


Ok ... what is your OPINION then ???


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

Dewey3 said:


> So you don't think that target shooting, say a 300 round, could ever help a newcomer to archery/bowhunting and would never recommend it to them on the new forum ???
> 
> If that is the case, THERE is my problem with the split (and it would be a split, IMHO) in a nutshell.



Good question actually...

My personal opinion on the subject is that will depend on how and what the poster asks ..

The context of the question is equally important...Are there other means of practice that can be utilized ..as opposed to a 300 round...yes there are for your information ..and IMHO ..more beneficial to a new hunter.

Mac





.


----------



## MrSinister (Jan 23, 2003)

Hey I love archery hit 3D every chance I get. Like to hunt though I don't get to shoot enough hunting LOL. That being said I have never desired to purchase a 300 round target for either a compound or a recurve. Just not my thing. Don't mind at all though sharing a forum with guys who do though. I would just tease them about trying to shoot the deer three times or something.:wink:


----------



## Dewey3 (May 6, 2012)

Thanks for the answer, Mac.

I will shut up now ..... :zip:


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

MrSinister said:


> Hey I love archery hit 3D every chance I get. Like to hunt though I don't get to shoot enough hunting LOL. That being said I have never desired to purchase a 300 round target for either a compound or a recurve. Just not my thing. Don't mind at all though sharing a forum with guys who do though. I would just tease them about trying to shoot the deer three times or something.:wink:


And I would not mind sharing a forum with you, even if you continuously voiced your disdain for it. Tolerance is a rare attribute in men these days. BTW, it's five arrows


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

JINKSTER said:


> yep...can't wait to see the first dude with a luxor with a laser screwed in the stab hole while shooting real barred feathers..and a floppy hat! :laugh:
> 
> I digress...i'm throwing in the towel...i'm feeling like as soon as i start using the arrow as a conscious sighting system?...the magic is gone...and every ounce of fun factor has been sucked out of the equation...matter fact?...i haven't touched a bow in a couple days now...not that i haven't had the time or energy but...if i'm gonna do all that?...i might as well just grab the omen and strap on a release so...i have no clue where i'm at right now or what to think of what...alls i know is what usta be a ton of fun?...has come dangerously close to "work"...and if that's the case?...i'm out. L8R, Bill.




I didn't say anything. That was your inner ***** talking.:chimpeep: Just watching.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Sanford said:


> According to rattus and jinks. Split vision, too.


What? What the heck is split vision...


----------



## Dewey3 (May 6, 2012)

rattus58 said:


> What? What the heck is split vision...


Rat - see the second example here: http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1775877


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Dewey3 said:


> Rat - see the second example here: http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1775877


Somewhat how I shoot.... and that aint traditional huh.... :grin:


----------



## Dewey3 (May 6, 2012)

rattus58 said:


> Somewhat how I shoot.... and that aint traditional huh.... :grin:


It is how I shoot also. 

I will probably go with a more formal gap mode later ... both seem "trad" to me, but what do I know, not being a member of the Trad Police Force nor having the Official Rules Book of Trad Archery ?!?


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

Palma said:


> If I only want to talk to Trads, there is a place for that.:zip:


This is the forum for Talking about Talking Trad.


----------



## voodoofire1 (Jan 24, 2006)

Kinda, it's the thread for talking about talking trad bowhunting....lol.....


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

MAC 11700 said:


> Our contention is Target archery and Bow Hunting are 2 totally separate disciplines each requiring differences in doing well and both are worthy enough to have their own respected forums to discuss in detail without 1 intruding on the other...Mac


Mac, you do realize that history of target archery, as set up under NFAA does not totally support that. Matter of fact, the NFAA was a direct breakaway, with much contention, away from what was considered "target archery" - the NAA or what we would call FITA tournaments today. Formal target stuff. Kinda like we have a FITA forum here at AT.

Way back in 1939, with the help of hunters and folks fed up with formal target mentality, folks who preferred a style more conducive to roving and instinctive shooting like they hunted, no formalities in targets involved, just plain roving the trails and shooting for fun and score, formed the organization and clubs, goaled to also help increase the interest in bowhunting. Matter of fact, Fred Bear happened to be the first champion of one such shoot in the first year of the NFAA.

The full history of that inaugural year is documented in the NFAA website. Interesting read.

Now, that may not mean a hill of beans in this age. But, when we talk of the old guys mentality, we have to know that they were way more than just ad-lib, ad hoc, type archery enthusiasts for the sole purpose getting bow proficient for hunting.

Maybe we can take a lesson that they also were not fans of concentric circle targets, like some of us. Or, that they really didn't care about scores, other than they did set them up and had champions. But, I think one thing history of the organization does bear out is that they cared for all types of archery within the scope of their interests, and did not consider one, target, separate from the other, rather, compliments. Maybe they knew that's how to share knowledge on shooting styles, compare, experiment, co-join what they knew from the target field with what they knew from the woods.

Why all this nonesense, well, it is history. Another reason is that your contention that target archery and hunting are two separate things, totally, is probably not where we came from, even by the intentions of some who now exemplify what you consider the old ways.

What you propose is actually moving backwards from what our predecessors like Bear actually wanted of us, to some degree. If you look at what IBO is all about, it's even harder to separate the two.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Sanford said:


> Mac, you do realize that history of target archery, as set up under NFAA does not totally support that. Matter of fact, the NFAA was a direct breakaway, with much contention, away from what was considered "target archery" - the NAA or what we would call FITA tournaments today. Formal target stuff. Kinda like we have a FITA forum here at AT.
> 
> Way back in 1939, with the help of hunters and folks fed up with formal target mentality, folks who preferred a style more conducive to roving and instinctive shooting like they hunted, no formalities in targets involved, just plain roving the trails and shooting for fun and score, formed the organization and clubs, goaled to also help increase the interest in bowhunting. Matter of fact, Fred Bear happened to be the first champion of one such shoot in the first year of the NFAA.
> 
> ...


To propose a bowhunting only sub-forum is moving backwards... to include a section for folks that are NOT INTERESTED in target archery is moving backwards? To say that you get the whole 0bamacare approach where you have to wade through dozens of threads to find what interests you as opposed to being able to identify your particular persuasion is going backwards? Some of us are not interested in IBO, NFAA, or any of it from an interest point of view... so you're seeming to say that in order to get your bowhunting interest satisfied, you must pay for all the rest of it too.... I see it as a question of FORCE versus CHOICE.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Rattus, that's the second biggest myth in this debate. Why don't you go to the front page and find the number of NAA, NFAA, IBO, etc... threads - report back, please. 

Could you create a forum where folks who do comment based on their endeavors and what works for them are not allowed to post their thoughts, hunting or not, sure! Ain't that the whole goal of the split?

Now, there's tons on bows, equipment, how to get into bowhunting, all kinds of stuff on gloves, tabs, quivers , bow quivers, stands, etc...(never even seen a target quiver question here before). Stuff that can pertain to any bowhunter, a little that can't. But to claim that this forum is dominated by target topics, or that target topics are ruining folks' ease at discussing bowhunting is just a myth.


----------



## rickstix (Nov 11, 2009)

I like it…and it gets an easy nod from me.

Although many types of practice, including target shooting, may benefit the bowhunter, becoming proficient with stick and string is only part of the equation…and this is simply not true for those that do not pair it with facing nature on her terms. Bowhunting, for all its diversity, is basically a relatively simple matter: acquire all the hunting knowledge and experience you can (…that’s an education that will never end)…and shoot as many thousand arrows as it takes to become confident at whatever distance is appropriate to the individual. Unless it’s a matter of survival (which may or may not have a presence in one’s thinking) no other shot should be taken. But that also kinda lies behind the whole matter, because first and foremost, the bowhunter carries a WEAPON…and the full burden of responsibility with its use, to the very best of his/her ability.

There would not, IMO, be any reason to treat many common subjects any differently in a bowhunting forum. And it would also be my sense that “it’s just not the same for everyone” seems to receive more general acceptance among those that are more intent on bowhunting; there is basically no argument with “whatever works”.

IMO, this represents sufficient reason for having a dedicated bowhunting section. It would be refreshing to have the opportunity to portray bowhunting in a serious, responsible fashion instead of the persistent interrupting outspokenness regarding those that are not, and may never be, proficient with a stick and string. Highlighting the lowest common denominator at nearly every opportunity only serves to distract from those in need of assistance/encouragement…and I would very much appreciate seeing some of that “my way” hit the highway. ‘Nuf said, Rick.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Sanford said:


> Rattus, that's the second biggest myth in this debate. Why don't you go to the front page and find the number of NAA, NFAA, IBO, etc... threads - report back, please.
> 
> Could you create a forum where folks who do comment based on their endeavors and what works for them are not allowed to post their thoughts, hunting or not, sure! Ain't that the whole goal of the split?
> 
> Now, there's tons on bows, equipment, how to get into bowhunting, all kinds of stuff on gloves, tabs, quivers , bow quivers, stands, etc...(never even seen a target quiver question here before). Stuff that can pertain to any bowhunter, a little that can't. But to claim that this forum is dominated by target topics, or that target topics are ruining folks' ease at discussing bowhunting is just a myth.


Let me put it to you this way.... I don't care what you are interested in. I am interested in Bowhunting. I don't care about sighting, split vision, monovision, or television, I like bowhunting issues and topics. I don't care that a 300 round could be argued that it relates to bowhunting because it means you have to hit what you're aiming at, it itself isn't BOWHUNTING. Shooting at game is bowhunting. kegan asking about getting ready... I'd not have even bothered to look at that other than he makes bows and I am working on that skill myself right now and wanted to see if that was about getting ready to build another bow.... if you had started that thread without it being in the bowhunting section, I'd have never opened it. Get it now? If I know its going to be about specifically bowhunting, and being here, with traditional equipment, is what I'm interested in. I don't care what YOU ARE INTERESTED IN NOR ANYONE ELSE! Get it????

If you haven't figured out that I SELFISHLY WOULD LOVE A BOWHUNTING SUB-FORUM for my own interests... then you need to read my posts more closely... and I don't need to go back and catalogue what is or isn't there... Those that are bowhunting related have to be tediously scoured to find them.


----------



## Bobman (Dec 18, 2004)

Rattus well said I feel the same way

thanks


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

This guys sent me a pm - he is looking for the new subforum (and the bathroom) - :tongue:


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

sharpbroadhead said:


> This guys sent me a pm - he is looking for the new subforum (and the bathroom) - :tongue:


What.. he get a stomachful of you?


----------



## WindWalker (Jan 23, 2005)

> This guys sent me a pm - he is looking for the new subforum (and the bathroom) -


Unnecessary and ridiculing crap; and you, Ken, are one _leading _reason many of us are fed up with much of the target/3-D BS and arguments that you and others inundate the Trad forum with, and why you have been banned or ostracized on several other archery forums.


----------



## Dewey3 (May 6, 2012)

Well, it's gone to the jury now, so we will see what they decide.

What will be, will be.

Debate over for me. :zip:


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Dewey3 said:


> Well, it's gone to the jury now, so we will see what they decide.
> 
> What will be, will be.
> 
> Debate over for me. :zip:


Que Sera Sera.... :grin:


----------



## rickstix (Nov 11, 2009)

sharpbroadhead said:


> This guys sent me a pm - he is looking for the new subforum (and the bathroom) - :tongue:


This accentuates what I'd said just a couple of posts ago..._"Highlighting the lowest common denominator at nearly every opportunity only serves to distract from those in need of assistance/encouragement…and I would very much appreciate seeing some of that “my way” hit the highway."_ 

Someone also recently said, after being here for many years, that they haven't seen any of the "my way or the highway" stuff. Well, it exists every time someone puts down another, or paints the collective with the same dirty brush...just because something doesn't meet with that person's approval. Worse...is that such comments deride people that are not here to speak up for themselves, or are made in such a general fashion that the negative intent is somewhat concealed. Such comments manage to serve up mass indictments upon those deemed to be lesser individuals…and upon which certain parties have set their pedestals. Such transparent tactics amount to little more than non-sensicle BS, to me. Rick.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

it was a joke - that is why the guy was smiling next to it with the tongue sticking out - If I wanted to get serious with the trad police and their new hunting thread - all I would have to do is dare to bring up that I have had success with Rage 40KE expandables and plan to use them next season too - or that I don't agree with Ashby and that my tests have found that a lighter faster arrow penetrates as good or better than a slower heavier arrow, or that I really like my Tradtech ILF bow, or that I use Angel Majesty fast flight string, or that I think the best practice for hunting is 3D competition or that I use deer cams, or that I have hunted over bait and would do it again, or that I wear camo and hunt out of treestands and even ground blinds once and a while, or that I hate wolves, or that I try to remain scent free and use some modern products to help me be as scent free as possible, or that I read from my Nook electronic book while on stand from time to time, or that I take a cell phone with my when I am hunting, or that I actually own a GPS and occassionally use it to mark treestands to make it easier to find in the dark of morning, etc...


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

I love it that folks like Sharp will be condescending, exclusionary, and rude, and then try to explain it away by saying that it all was a joke. As for the police argument, its laughable... disingenuous, and reminds me that it is not anyone wanting a Bowhunting Sub-Forum doing any kind of policing.... and it is hilarious that all the things they lists as police items haven't been argued by anyone wanting a Bowhunting sub-forum! ... Guilt? Hahahahahhaa


----------



## WindWalker (Jan 23, 2005)

> If I wanted to get serious with the trad police and their new hunting thread


Sharp is incapable of having a normal debate unless everyone in the debate is in total agreement with everything he says. How much longer do (we) have to endure him? What he has to offer is greatly overshadowed by his never-ending BS and stirring the pot.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

sharpbroadhead said:


> This guys sent me a pm - he is looking for the new subforum (and the bathroom) - :tongue:


Joke or no joke....Uncalled for, IMO...at least under the circumstances. Comments like that do nothing to help bring any healing or unity to this forum. 

The fact that you cry everytime someone does the same back at you gets annoying. It's like you're Crying Wolf :wink:

Most of us who have spent enough time on the internet know exactly where you stand on this issue, sharp....and many of us know that you believe there is some truth to what you posted and we know you do NOT like anything related to Asbel...no matter if the archer is a bowhunter or target archer.

The fact of the matter is...there are legitimate reasons why some of these aspects of form are taught and they have just as much right to be taught here as does any of Ricky Welch's techniques or FITA techniques.

Ray :shade:


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

So what we have is 2 or 3 members who don't like one other member and think that they need a subforum so they don't have to endure 'him' anymore? Uh oh, 'him' is a hunter too.

I did'nt see anything wrong with the joke. Is it a full moon or something? Where's your sense of humor?


----------



## WindWalker (Jan 23, 2005)

> So what we have is 2 or 3 members who don't like one other member and think that they need a subforum


You just don't comprehend the facts; or just playing your normal stirring the pot with little to contribute for either targeteering or bowhunting?


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

FORESTGUMP said:


> I did'nt see anything wrong with the joke. Where's your sense of humor?


I love jokes...and I love taking light hearted digs at my friends from time to time...BUT...it's REALLY annoying when sharp or anyone else for that matter crys about it when a joke or dig is pointed at them...but they do it all the time. They can dish it out...but they can't take it.

Digs amoung friends can be funny...but when it's really a cover to how you really feel and is basically just a lame attempt to cause strife or stir the pot...it get's OLD!

Ray :shade:


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

are you serious - and these comments from these two threads are bringing unity? and you call me out on an attempt to lighten things up - an obvious joke - with the smiley guy sticking his tongue out:

Here are some nice comments meant to bring the forum together and funny Black Wolf you did not call any of these guys out:

_I may piss off some, and I do not care, but it is my opinion that some that are strictly or primarily target shooters that have voted “no” are again demonstrating what they constantly do in many of the threads; they hijack the threads with their elitist target/3-D, over-the-top techy-talk, BS and eventually the thread turns into a meaningless, self-serving, look-down-the-nose, and berating mess of crap that is eventually locked down. Now some of the same people/types want to hijack an entire forum. _ WindWalker

_Your asinine and belittling comments and challenge directed at Rat-Man is the kind of crap you are famous for. In fact, if one was to peruse many of your posts I believe they would find that you constantly follow the same theme and contribute little that I would consider constructive. _ WindWalker - and btw - this was not directed toward me

_then who would all those "targeteers" have to talk down to?..but then we'd prolly get silly questions like...
__"Okay...i'm 25' up a tree in a climbing tree stand on the side of a hill looking down into a thick bottom...i have survey tap at 20, 30 and 40yds for reference...there's a huge buck between the 20 & 30...i'm having to lean out, duck under a limb and cant my bow heavily to get the shot...what's my gap?...sent from my droid via tapatalk." _ Jinkster

_I'm not really into 0bamacarelike/IRS book of rules, so that if Sharp wanted to post another hunt with his Rage broadheads, he'd be banned.... _ Rattus

_Let's not make it more divided because of a few who don't get it._ Viper


_spoken like someone who can't hit the broadside of a barn but sure wants to put down those that can.Sour grapes personified_ Itbeso

_Take it to the target forums. If we are talking bowhunting most will not want to hear about target shooting, 3-D tournaments, scores, winners, who is the greatest target/3-D shooter since sliced bread, or some pompous back-slapping BS, that has little to nothing to do with bowhunting. Some of you paper and foam punchers are just not getting it; there are a number of BOWHUNTERS who have tired...fed up... of hearing your elitist and pompous or unrelated crap. Granted, it will take a bit of trial and error to determine what is or is not appropriate for the Bowhunting forum, but in time it will be worked out. Then maybe a bowhunting thread will survive longer and will have more than a few responses before the thread is pushed out of sight and a out of mind by all the target and techy-talk threads. _ Windwalker

etc....

and last but not least - if my pic, that was CLEARLY meant to be humerous was sooooo horrible that I had to have three of the usuals call me out on it and practically call for me being banned - why was Windwalker not called for posting this pic?










I don't care about any of those comments above or the pic that Windwalker posted - it was obviously funny - but I find it funny that the same guys will call me out for any little thing, and as in this case even twist something that was CLEARLY meant to add humor - but oh boy they don't call others out


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

FORESTGUMP said:


> So what we have is 2 or 3 members who don't like one other member and think that they need a subforum so they don't have to endure 'him' anymore? Uh oh, 'him' is a hunter too.
> 
> I did'nt see anything wrong with the joke. Is it a full moon or something? Where's your sense of humor?


Trust me... I wasn't thinking about getting away from anyone, and I don't think that motivated a single individual to gravitating towards the desire of a traditional bowhunting section in the least. For one thing... no one who wants a bowhunting forum is trying to EXCLUDE ANYONE from participating in the forum... and if they strat in with the 300 rounds and the like.. will be reminded that there is a place for that unless it specifically relates to bowhunting.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

sharpbroadhead said:


> are you serious - and these comments from these two threads are bringing unity? and you call me out on an attempt to lighten things up - an obvious joke - with the smiley guy sticking his tongue out:
> 
> Here are some nice comments meant to bring the forum together and funny Black Wolf you did not call any of these guys out:
> 
> ...


Yeah Sharp... and you notice that I supported your rage in the forum... "*I'm not really into 0bamacarelike/IRS book of rules, so that if Sharp wanted to post another hunt with his Rage broadheads, he'd be banned.... Rattus *

meaning sharp... unlike you, I support your posting about rage...


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

rattus - I may have misread your post - but the point I was making is that those quotes I posted above were very divisive and there is not a single difference between the funny pic I posted and the one that windwalker posted - except that the same few guys who desire to see me get banned - want to try and turn my pic into something it was not meant to be.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Joke or no joke....Uncalled for, IMO...at least under the circumstances. Comments like that do nothing to help bring any healing or unity to this forum.
> 
> The fact that you cry everytime someone does the same back at you gets annoying. It's like you're Crying Wolf :wink:
> 
> ...



Ok,under the circumstances maybe the timing wasn't perfect for a joke. There are some people spoiling for an argument,and they particularly enjoy dog pileing the person who made the untimely joke. 

Please enlighten me what 'issue' we're talking about here,in this case.

I agree that different aspects of form have a right to be discussed. That goes on all the time,so all good. This is a forum open to all members and to use the dog pile method like school children in a debate just is not cool. It's painfully obvious that a few people see sharpbroadhead as the worm in the apple around here but I have a newsflash for you peeps. Not too long ago he was not frequenting the forum and the same old bs went on. So for some who happen to have some axe to grind against this person to make it look like it's all his fault just doesn't hold water.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

sharpbroadhead said:


> Here are some nice comments meant to bring the forum together and funny Black Wolf you did not call any of these guys out:


Matter of fact...I did.

Go ahead and continue to defend and justify your poor behavior here.

It's rather sad...when all you really have to do is JUST STOP but you rather think of yourself as some kind of martyr rather than a solution to the problem.

Ray :shade:


----------



## WindWalker (Jan 23, 2005)

> why was windwalker not called for posting this pic?


lol!


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

sharpbroadhead said:


> rattus - I may have misread your post - but the point I was making is that those quotes I posted above were very divisive and there is not a single difference between the funny pic I posted and the one that windwalker posted - except that the same few guys who desire to see me get banned - want to try and turn my pic into something it was not meant to be.


I misread stuff all the time... so I'm glad we got that cleared up. I support bowhunting and if you're doing it with traditional equipment, I'm for learning. If rage is your preferred choice of head, so be it, snuffers are mine. You and I disagree on lots of stuff, but I sure don't have any right to suggest that you can't post your opinions. So we should probably just understand that you and I will continue to agree to disagree... :grin:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Ok,under the circumstances maybe the timing wasn't perfect for a joke.


I'm glad you recognize that.



FORESTGUMP said:


> I agree that different aspects of form have a right to be discussed.


:thumbs_up



FORESTGUMP said:


> Not too long ago he was not frequenting the forum and the same old bs went on.


Very true. Because of human nature...it would be hard not to have conflict from time to time...but just because people disagree does NOT mean that the debate has to turn disrespectful. 

There are a few people who instigate the disrespect, scarcasm and digs and others like myself who use to retalliate against it and cause these conflicts to drag on. I personally refuse to retalliate like that anymore and rather hold those people accountable through notifications to the Mod or addressing it when they do it as I am now.

Ray :shade:


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

rattus58 said:


> Yeah Sharp... and you notice that I supported your rage in the forum... "*I'm not really into 0bamacarelike/IRS book of rules, so that if Sharp wanted to post another hunt with his Rage broadheads, he'd be banned.... Rattus *
> 
> meaning sharp... unlike you, I support your posting about rage...


I think I might have missread that too. Apologies. But,I do believe that the broadhead evidence is about as close to truely hunting oriented as one can get.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

FORESTGUMP said:


> I think I might have missread that too. Apologies. But,I do believe that the broadhead evidence is about as close to truely hunting oriented as one can get.


My momma was an english teacher... what'd you expect from me.... :grin:


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

BLACK WOLF said:


> I'm glad you recognize that.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Not sure it's a good idea to start a 'cry to the moderator' competition. Everyone has the same right to that action. If I were a moderaor I know it would get annoying to me. I would not admit it but would likely judge such frequent flyers as PITA.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

rattus58 said:


> My momma was an english teacher... what'd you expect from me.... :grin:



Excuses,excuses. But even if it's not original it's still a good one.
How do you feel about sharpbroadheads testing of the mechanical broadheads? Seems that would be perfect information to have available in a hunting only oriented subforum. After all,whats more hunting specific than broadheads?


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Excuses,excuses. But even if it's not original it's still a good one.
> How do you feel about sharpbroadheads testing of the mechanical broadheads? Seems that would be perfect information to have available in a hunting only oriented subforum. After all,whats more hunting specific than broadheads?


:grin: I personally have no bias against mechanical broadheads. I don't use them and have no inclination to, as I'm regressing more and more.... broadheads out of coke bottles is probably in my future before a mechanical.... just cuz I don't .... doesn't mean you don't does it? I'd only suggest that if you start talking about cam tuning, you take it to where it belongs.... cuz it don't belong here....


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

FORESTGUMP said:


> If I were a moderaor I know it would get annoying to me.


This is what Simon told me how he prefers that we handle these situations. Believe me I rather deal with it on my own.

Ray :wink:


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

I was told the same thing


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

rattus58 said:


> :grin: I personally have no bias against mechanical broadheads. I don't use them and have no inclination to, as I'm regressing more and more.... broadheads out of coke bottles is probably in my future before a mechanical.... just cuz I don't .... doesn't mean you don't does it? I'd only suggest that if you start talking about cam tuning, you take it to where it belongs.... cuz it don't belong here....


FYI coke bottles aren't made from glass anymore. But if you can find the old glass ones it sounds like a good idea. I'm the same like you,leaning more towards primitive every day. I have a couple of bows in process and have been playing around with bush arrows lately. I am enjoying that because I can just go out back and cut the materials I need. Haven't finished any yet but it looks promising so far.


----------



## DeerSpotter (Jan 29, 2007)

I don't think it makes any difference read you have a separate one are not ,Guys that shoot bows separate themselves anyway . Example Matthew shooter compared to a Hoyt ! You see now bring a Bowtech shooter in or Or should we even talk to him ?

Choice of Brands we shoot separate us because we get proud not because anyone of them are better they'll do the same thing they bring home meat. 

Oh boy I forgot this should we even let target shooters say they're actually archers when they've never killed in animal !


I don't really think it makes any difference there's enough separation to go around for everybody !!!

I really don't care what brand a guy shoots ,Or what type of arrows he has, we can all learn from each other by applying the things we've learned and passing on 

Carl


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

sharpbroadhead said:


> I was told the same thing



Boy,if you become a PITA crybaby,you will no be my hero anymore.:59:
It just seems to me that with too many PMs he would not have time to do anything else.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

wow - I am someone's hero - lol


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

sharpbroadhead said:


> wow - I am someone's hero - lol


Well maybe you could be if you didn't shoot those wimpy arrows.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Lol


----------



## Bigjono (Apr 21, 2009)

Why does almost every thread on here end up like this.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

FORESTGUMP said:


> FYI coke bottles aren't made from glass anymore. But if you can find the old glass ones it sounds like a good idea. I'm the same like you,leaning more towards primitive every day. I have a couple of bows in process and have been playing around with bush arrows lately. I am enjoying that because I can just go out back and cut the materials I need. Haven't finished any yet but it looks promising so far.


I'm aging myself probably some then... :grin: yeah I've got two strawberry guava logs drying right now to shape into a self bow and i've also thought really seriously of making arrows from them. I've routered a couple examples already and now that I've a tapering jig, sanding them to size shouldn't be much of a challenge.... but .... proof will be in the puddin... as they are wont to say... :grin:


----------



## Dewey3 (May 6, 2012)

Actually, you CAN find glass Coke bottles, and with REAL SUGAR.

We have them in our grocery store.

Imported from Mexico ....

But they're not those wonderful old green glass ones, with the bottling city on the bottom. (Sigh)

Better to try flint than glass, Rat.


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Bigjono said:


> Why does almost every thread on here end up like this.



Like this? How like this?


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Dewey3 said:


> Actually, you CAN find glass Coke bottles, and with REAL SUGAR.
> 
> We have them in our grocery store.
> 
> Imported from Mexico ....


 Really? What's mexican glass like I wonder... or is glass, glass?


----------



## FORESTGUMP (May 14, 2008)

Dewey3 said:


> Actually, you CAN find glass Coke bottles, and with REAL SUGAR.
> 
> We have them in our grocery store.
> 
> ...


Yeah, I know,I was just pulling his string.


----------



## Dewey3 (May 6, 2012)

rattus58 said:


> Really? What's mexican glass like I wonder... or is glass, glass?


Near as I can tell. 

But clear, not green tinted like the old ones.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Dewey3 said:


> Near as I can tell.
> 
> But clear, not green tinted like the old ones.


Maybe i should go shopping sometime.... I don't generally consider myself part of the help round here... but hey... :grin:


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

rattus58 said:


> Maybe i should go shopping sometime.... I don't generally consider myself part of the help round here... but hey... :grin:


In Mexico, they still sweeten Coke with real sugar instead of corn syrup as here. They also use recycled bottles, remember the old beat up bottles? Here in the South, folks that are native to Mexico will only drink Coke with real sugar, as they claim to taste the difference. Many places here stock imported Coke for that reason, old clear recycled bottles and all.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Sanford said:


> In Mexico, they still sweeten Coke with real sugar instead of corn syrup as here. They also use recycled bottles, remember the old beat up bottles? Here in the South, folks that are native to Mexico will only drink Coke with real sugar, as they claim to taste the difference. Many places here stock imported Coke for that reason, old clear recycled bottles and all.


How cool.... I'm thinking those with discriminating tastes would certainly be able to taste the difference. We used to have pure cane sugar that my dad would bring home in a jar my mom would use for cooking and deserts. I'd love to get some old coke bottles just because... you know... :grin: like me....


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

Sanford said:


> Mac, you do realize that history of target archery, as set up under NFAA does not totally support that. Matter of fact, the NFAA was a direct breakaway, with much contention, away from what was considered "target archery" - the NAA or what we would call FITA tournaments today. Formal target stuff. Kinda like we have a FITA forum here at AT.
> 
> Way back in 1939, with the help of hunters and folks fed up with formal target mentality, folks who preferred a style more conducive to roving and instinctive shooting like they hunted, no formalities in targets involved, just plain roving the trails and shooting for fun and score, formed the organization and clubs, goaled to also help increase the interest in bowhunting. Matter of fact, Fred Bear happened to be the first champion of one such shoot in the first year of the NFAA.
> 
> ...


Mine and others here feel the same way...Target Archery and Traditional bow hunting are 2 totally different disciplines...and...AFAIK...2 totally different mindsets...regardless of what any target archery organization states even if that organizations initials is IBO...

Tell me something...if this were not true...why would more emphasis be on putting profits above ethical shooting situations....and in doing so..allowing the scoring points by taking wounding shots... *if* these shoots are trying to teach new hunters or are actually best used as practice for hunting as some here state and want others to believe... How does taking shots at animals when it is clearly a no shoot scenario with the set ups many have teach anyone what is and isn't proper shooting situation ? 

All hunters are under the microscope...everyone on this forum knows this and everyone knows it is not really going to get better...burying our heads in the sand isn't going to cut it anymore..and until some real block headed folks understand we need to be able to say NO...I refuse to take that shot regardless of wither or not I will win that event ...especially when it is a low percentage shot...it isn't going to change..

Tell me...why in the world would I as a ethical hunter should go to or promote any type competition that does this wither they use paper or foam ? 


Some here might say... Damn Mac..after all...how could I ever win...if all of my bad hits were penalized and that I had all those points removed from my score card,like using the Fred Bear scoring system ? 

Because...I would tell them... you should never have even consider taking a risky shot..and you did...after all aren't you replicating your shooting skills at a target that represents a live animal in the feild...? You know damn well that any animal that is moving,at a bad angle, obscured behind brush..and if it's head and ears are pointed at you..is a no shoot situation..and to shoot at it..is a very low percentage shot to begin with and would could most likely become a wound in real life that you are imitating...regardless wither you can thread a needle at 30 yards at any 3d deer target or bulls eye ?..But..for you to compete the whole purpose for doing so is to actually more often than not is to win at these events...and that makes it ok to risk those shots ? Why ?

I would say to that person...Hunting is not competition...and if your practicing..you should be ashamed of taking a low percentage shot knowing full well it is not what your supposed to do in real life... It's about hunting..and that is about taking a animals life... and while you may use the same equipment..you may use the same arrows..you may use the same sighting method...hunting is not about turning in a score card for a prize...it is about putting that arrow inside the kill zone.. and knowing when and when not to shoot... is it not ? Then turning in the score card is for trying to win...and you should be penalized for doing a bone headed thing like that..That's what I would tell that person..but...that's how I am..I'm practical in my approach..but..won't risk a shot that is a low percentage shot just because I am shooting at targets well..

See...this is really showing this fact to every one..and to those who feel like me and to many others as well... to some of these competitors here..and there... who don't really get the harm they are doing...after all...it's just a competition..but they all have said it is about teaching..and practicing for hunting haven't they...Be honest now......and so I say...For what...to compete..to win..for a trophy or belt buckle..a cash award...for the chance to say I competed...I pitted my skills against others and came in 1st place...I am a top rank tournament shooter..Big Dam Deal...that...and what that is all about is not hunting...and never will be..and some of us here know this as a fact...not just an opinion...

Want to make it better...Want to discuss this in details...Would changing the scoring system hurt the really good shooters ? I don't think so...there might be some lower scores...but the best will always come out at the top..but...even the best will have misses...Hows changing the scoring system going to help then...weeeeeeeell... if points were deducted and they lost the competition because of it...I honestly think it would do more good than harm..see..if they lost because of it..it might..._just might_ make them not so willing to take a risky shot in the feild they just knew they could make because they do it all the time on a foam target..and that _might make_ 1 less wounded animal needlessly suffering..or found by someone who was thinking about letting bow hunters on their land..but changed their minds because of finding that deer that was wounded weeks/months after it had been shot..or even found/saw walking with a arrow hanging out of it..or a nasty wound/broken leg hobbling along by some animal rights activist...Can you see my point..but..step back a second...and take a somewhat new person all gung ho at one of these shooting events...and then he sees some top notch shooter taking these shots just to win the competition and making hits..but still getting points awarded..and nothing is said why "he" shouldn't...so he tries to emulate one of these guys in the feild....You competition guys...especially you top shooters in the sport...You don't think this actually happens...? Believe me it does..

I'm all for teaching a new hunter my way of hunting as opposed to some of what is being taught with the target/competition way...My way isn't so stringent the new hunter couldn't have fun..and do well really...and even if they didn't win.. they damn well will learn when it is appropriate for them to shoot and not shoot..regardless if they "know" they can make that shot on a foam or paper target. Why...I am teaching basic ethics...I am teaching when to shoot...and when not to shoot...to give the hunter the most realistic chance at NOT WOUNDING ANY ANIMAL...this is basic ethics...101..and shooting a 300 round is not going to be part of this lesson..These folks will know if a top ranked competitor is taking a risky shot to win...that in doing so only reinforces that it is ok to do this in the feild to those who are new to the sport...and don't know any better...especially if all of the shooters around them are doing the same..It isn't do as I say...not as I do..we have to practice what we preach...I can go to bed with a clear conscious knowing full well I do this..

I can't do this on the traditional forum as it is right now...you know why...stick around and see who says what to prove me wrong..Hunting is not about winning or competing..and if your competition has made you feel it is...then your competition has made you loose what it really means to hunt.This is not backwards Bro...this is being pro-active to help hunters who don't know what they are supposed to do with out BS involved.. I know...another Mac Book...I apologize..

Mac


----------



## Arrowwood (Nov 16, 2010)

Mac, you lost me at "Target Archery and Traditional bow hunting are 2 totally different disciplines". The rest of it sounds like "no bowhunter left behind".


----------



## voodoofire1 (Jan 24, 2006)

FORESTGUMP said:


> Not sure it's a good idea to start a 'cry to the moderator' competition. Everyone has the same right to that action. If I were a moderaor I know it would get annoying to me. I would not admit it but would likely judge such frequent flyers as PITA.


It's just the world we live in now, people don't and for the most part can't take care of problems anymore , we have been conditioned over the last few decades to let the proper authorities handle problems asap, can't blame people for listening and doing what their told, ...Myself, I miss the old days and pounding the crap out of someone who has truly earned it......snitches are *****es.....


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Oh my gosh now the ethics of great organizatons like the IBO are being called into question because they allow a score of 5 points for a hit that is outside the vitals. 

Mac - I hate to tell you this - but I would love to see a penalty on hits outside the vitals - but then - if that were to happen - traditional archery would really be in trouble - as many if not most would score a negative score - and then the calls for ethics would land right in your lap! After such poor scores would expose the poor level of accuracy by the majority of traditional shooters - I am certian that we would see proficiency tests in order to prove that you are effective with your weapon - and this would without a doubt be the end of traditional bowhunting as we know it. A hunter can wound and miss many many animals and he is the only one who knows it - but when there is scores kept and when you are shooting with others - you cannot hide it.

The vast majority of trad shooters cannot manage to average a vital hit on every target now and that is with taking five points for hits outside the vitals - with no score for fives or better yet a penalty of a negative score for hits outside hte vitals the scores would be so horrible that I have no doubt that the calls for proficiency tests would be made. 

do you think that the vast majority of trad hunters could put 6 out of 6 arrows in the vitals of say a whitetail at say 20 yards if their hunting license depended on it? I suspect that the vast majority would give up trad and go to compounds and then the big shops would stop carrying trad, the trad only shops would go out of business, etc...

Be careful what you wish for - you might get it!

And where do you come up with this stuff about no shot scenarios - there are no no shot scenarios at any 3D shoot I have ever attended and the IBO goes out of their way to make sure every shot is a broadside shot with the entire target visible.

I think we all know that some of the best and most serious bowhunters in the United States are also members of the IBO and shoot competitively.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

After reading Mac's post again - he either must be of bad will and purposely setting up a strawman that he can tear down in his attack against the IBO - or - the more likely case - he simply has no idea what he is taking about because he has never attended an IBO shoot - because there are no "unethical" shots and "no shot scenarios" at IBO shoots, there are no shots obscured by brush, etc... and for him to make that claim that somehow the IBO is putting "profits above ehtical shooting" is out right slanderous.


----------



## voodoofire1 (Jan 24, 2006)

" I would love to see a penalty on hits outside the vitals"

I would too, and I believe the kill zone area needs to be enlarged a bit(rearward) before that happens, I've always hated 5's and do my best not to get any at all, if I were penalized 5 points, I would try even harder not to get them, and I believe others would too, and I don't think it would end trad archery, trad archers would step up and shoot better, they score 5's because it's a score, if if it were a penalty they would try harder..........and no most trad archers cannot score 6 of 6 in a kill zone!....think I'm kidding, set up a test target at you next shoot and keep track, I'd bet it would be less than 25%........We did it once, and it was so bad no one even wanted to talk about it............then again Sharpy may be right... hope he's not though....and wishfull thinking on my part.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Even the best trad shooters shoot fives - and really - a five is a penalty it is less than half the total possible points - and many times the fives are just a fraction of an inch outside the line. There is no perfect way to score - but I think it is fine as it is - it is just a way to keep track of progress and a means of competition. There is no perfect way to practice for hunting - but 3D is a close as one can get.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Hey voodoo - I just read about your cancer - my prayers are with you on this. Accept it as a cross to bear and offer it united with what our Lord went through for us on the Cross and you will make something truly Holy out of whatever it is you have to go through in this fight.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

MAC 11700 said:


> I'm all for *teaching a new hunter my way of hunting* as opposed to some of what is being taught with the target/competition way...My way isn't so stringent the new hunter couldn't have fun..and do well really...and even if they didn't win.. they damn well will learn when it is appropriate for them to shoot and not shoot..regardless if they "know" they can make that shot on a foam or paper target. Why...I am teaching basic ethics...I am teaching when to shoot...and when not to shoot...to give the hunter the most realistic chance at NOT WOUNDING ANY ANIMAL...this is basic ethics...101..and shooting a 300 round is not going to be part of this lesson..These folks will know if a top ranked competitor is taking a risky shot to win...that in doing so only reinforces that it is ok to do this in the feild to those who are new to the sport...and don't know any better...especially if all of the shooters around them are doing the same..It isn't do as I say...not as I do..we have to practice what we preach...I can go to bed with a clear conscious knowing full well I do this..
> 
> *I can't do this on the traditional forum as it is right now *...you know why...stick around and see who says what to prove me wrong..Hunting is not about winning or competing..and if your competition has made you feel it is...then your competition has made you loose what it really means to hunt.This is not backwards Bro...this is being pro-active to help hunters who don't know what they are supposed to do with out BS involved.. I know...another Mac Book...I apologize..
> 
> Mac


Well, Mac, I at least admire that you finally came out and said what this is all about. I'm not parsing words together up there to make a case, as that would not be fair, but, how people write out their thoughts pretty much sums up what they are thinking. I don't disagree at all with you having your opinion. I would disagree that your opinion needs a separate forum. We all could use that, no?


----------



## voodoofire1 (Jan 24, 2006)

I'll do mybest Sharp, and hope god shines his light upon me again.....

Also I'saw a darn near perfect way to score, no questions, it was at the STA's Catch- a-dream shoot on the crybaby round.... they took a pice of heavy wire and placed it around the kill areas, you were either in or out, no cutting the line, I liked it!!


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

how about the steel targets with the hole in the vitals - no questions there -


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

Sanford said:


> Well, Mac, I at least admire that you finally came out and said what this is all about. I'm not parsing words together up there to make a case, as that would not be fair, but, how people write out their thoughts pretty much sums up what they are thinking. I don't disagree at all with you having your opinion. I would disagree that your opinion needs a separate forum. We all could use that, no?




No..you can play sharp's childish game with pulling just 1 little part out..and try to twist it around to show something it's not all you want to...it won't do you any good ...

This is a part of my reasons ..and the moderator and administrator knows this

It does show what level you will go to...just to minimize others feelings ..

Mac .


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

"childish game" - you write an entire post the size of a small book bashing the IBO for setting up unethical shots and putting profts ahead of bowhunting ethics and I call you on it and that is childish - you better take a long hard look in the mirror - what you posted was untrue, unfair, and slanderous. I happen to like the IBO, support the IBO, and attend their shoots and what you said is bovine excrement and should not even be allowed on this forum - it was totally untrue and shows that you have no idea what you are talking about regarding that organization.


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

sharpbroadhead said:


> childish game - you write an entire post the size of a small book bashing the IBO for setting up unethical shots and putting profts ahead of bowhunting ethics and I call you on it and that is childish - you better take a long hard look in the mirror - what you posted was wrong, unfair, and slanderous.



Prove me wrong sharp ..it's not slanderous to speak the truth.

Mac


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Prove you wrong? Really - well why don't you actually show up at an IBO event and show us these unethical shots where there is a no shot scenario - YOU MADE THE CLAIM -not me - I cannot prove a negative. I have attended NUMEROUS IBO shoots and never has there been anything but completely in the open broadside targets - and for you to claim otherwise shows you to be ignorant of the facts or intentionally deceptive - and anyone who has ever attended any IBO shoot can attest to this.

And for you to claim that the IBO puts profits ahead of ethics is ABSURD and slanderous and this forum should not even allow a post like that attacking one of the greatest BOWHUNTING organizations in this nation!


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Sorry guys - but this just gets under my skin when people lie about an organization that I respect and enjoy and that does more in one day to help promote and protect bowhunting than these guys bashing them do in a lifetime!

I dont' support and agree with all bowhunting clubs - but I don't lie about them or call them unethical - I don't like the Compton's promotes this non-compete stuff - but I would never call them unethical


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Could it be...that some other archers have attended some other IBO shoots where the targets were set up to cause someone to think they might have been setup unethically???

Ray :shade:


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

MAC 11700 said:


> No..you can play sharp's childish game with pulling just 1 little part out..and try to twist it around to show something it's not all you want to...it won't do you any good ...
> 
> This is a part of my reasons ..and the moderator and administrator knows this
> 
> ...


If you cannot tell me why if a discussion on how to become proficient with a bow for a hunter can be discussed under *your* context and it can fit the forum, then, why can't Sharp explain what makes him a good bowhunter, or why someone can't recommend a good book on shooting a bow like "Shooting the Stickbow, or someone can't explain how a Welch school helped them, or someone with a Jenkins school, or the guy who bought videos.... I can understand not discussing scores, events, shoots, or club stuff, BUT, if the aforementioned discussion is open, it's open. Mac, this is a forum of "opinions" - note the plural. 

If I read you wrong about wanting a forum for only one opinion on shooting, sorry. If not, then no, my read was correct, as I did not see anything in your post that pertained to anything to do with the new forum suggested other than a style of shooting being promoted as being Trad Bowhunter.


----------



## Wayko (Dec 22, 2011)

I voted "yes" the main reason is, because I thought it would be faster for me to find the tid-bits that work for me, less digging so to say.
But, I guess I did not read the question correctly, while reading some of the post I see that I am wrong, this seems more of a want to or not want to competition thing.
Forgive me, I don't fully understand, (ya I know, sharpest broadhead in the pack). But it seems to me everytime ya string your bow, you are in a competition, some like competition with others, some like competition with themself, etc. Every deer season in one way or another, I'am in competition with the weather, the deer, & other hunters (I mostly hunt public land). All my practice is competition, my competition is getting every arrow to hit right were I'am looking, no matter what position I'am in, been trying since the late 60's & I'am not there yet, but as long as I'am looking over top of the dirt, I'll keep the competition I have with myself, (maybe one day I can beat me, so to say...but then watch out cause I'll be looking to beat others then..LOL). 
I really don't see the reason for the bad blood over something I think we all do in one form or another. Or is this is a another competition at a different level?


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

sharpbroadhead said:


> Even the best trad shooters shoot fives - and really - a five is a penalty it is less than half the total possible points - and many times the fives are just a fraction of an inch outside the line. There is no perfect way to score - but I think it is fine as it is - it is just a way to keep track of progress and a means of competition. There is no perfect way to practice for hunting - but 3D is a close as one can get.


I had asked you earlier if you shot using the Fred Bear scoring system, which if I understand it correctly, provided(s) for DEDUCTIONS of points, not just less or no points and would you support that scoring scenario for competition?


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Sanford said:


> Well, Mac, I at least admire that you finally came out and said what this is all about. I'm not parsing words together up there to make a case, as that would not be fair, but, how people write out their thoughts pretty much sums up what they are thinking. I don't disagree at all with you having your opinion. I would disagree that your opinion needs a separate forum. We all could use that, no?


I want a separate SUB FORUM so that bowhunting ... specifically TRADITIONAL style bowhunting forum in order that specifically bowhunting interests... MINE, can be accessed without all of the other interestes having to be negotiated.


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

sharpbroadhead said:


> Prove you wrong? Really - well why don't you actually show up at an IBO event and show us these unethical shots where there is a no shot scenario - YOU MADE THE CLAIM -not me - I cannot prove a negative. I have attended NUMEROUS IBO shoots and never has there been anything but completely in the open broadside targets - and for you to claim otherwise shows you to be ignorant of the facts or intentionally deceptive - and anyone who has ever attended any IBO shoot can attest to this.
> 
> And for you to claim that the IBO puts profits ahead of ethics is ABSURD and slanderous and this forum should not even allow a post like that attacking one of the greatest BOWHUNTING organizations in this nation!


OK..that is easy enough..

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=928330

What are the reasons discussed here..for teaching youths who also participate in sactioned IBO shoots..?

Here's some of the rules for shooting a IBO shoot Ken..as you well know..

_4. Targets should be set so they are distinguishable with their vital areas (8 ring)
unobstructed.
Care shall be taken when setting targets not to over rotate or excessively lean the targets to ensure that the *entire vital area* can be safely shot.
_

Nothing real world there..nothing showing a shoot or no shoot just making it real easy to score a hit..Why ? explain to me why Ken..

_Scoring Areas
For all IBO-sanctioned shooting events, the targets shall have scoring areas as follows:
1. An “11” ring consisting of a circle centered within the 10 ring. The circle size should be approximately twenty five percent (25%) of the size of the 10 ring.
2. A 10 ring consisting of a circle inside the vital area.
3. A vital area (8 ring) that roughly approximates the heart, lung, and liver area of the appropriate animal.
4. The remainder of the animal shall be considered a “body” except as set out in Paragraph 5 below.
5. An arrow embedded in the horn of an animal, not touching body color, is considered a miss and is scored as a zero. Targets with legs or hooves of a different color than the main body will still be considered as body color for scoring.
6. Some targets have material surrounding the actual outline of a target animal. This additional material will NOT be counted for score.

Scoring Arrows
a. Scores will be tabulated as follows:
i. 11 points: 11 ring or “X” ring centered inside the 10 ring
ii. 10 points: 10 ring or heart
iii. 8 points: Vital
iv. 5 points: Body
v. 0 points: Miss or arrow not touching body color._

What is being taught here Ken..ethical shooting situations..or just what is needed for a score card?

The problem is..unless clubs that hold these events draw enough people to them to off set the cost of them or in some cases break even..or even show a small profit..fewer and fewer of them will hold them. The economic situation out weighs teaching proper ethics..Why..because it has to be fun...to get people there...It has to be easy enough..to get all types of shooters there to participate..not just those that are in your league of shooting Bro..This is the reality of this..Many small clubs can't afford to pay for the targets needed to hold these types of shoots...you know this..however..

I know full well other clubs do things different..and they make ethical shots the norm...and they even have those targets with the holes cut out in them for the vitals..like this one did..

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1536598&highlight=fred+bear+scoring+system

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=686442&page=2&highlight=fred+bear+scoring+system

This is the way it should be done..not only to have fun..but to ensure the message of being a ethical bow hunter is not lost for the sake of just competition..for a prize.

Is this way of doing it more difficult..yes..will fewer shooters go to this than one easier...yes.....but I say this way of scoring more accurate to use for a teaching tool for all who attend..than the Ibo's way above...and even those steel maiden targets...risk vs rewards are worth more as a teaching aid.. This will stay with a new person in the feild..It may not effect you as much as it would someone new to the sport Ken..since you are a good shot anyway..but not all are...

............................................................................................................................................................................

Sanford..you keep going round and round..This is not the only thing or reason for my wanting a Traditional Bow Hunting sub-forum..but just part of all of my reasoning..and I agree with many others and their reasons as well..Do I need to post everything in 1 post..crap...people complain now about how long I make some post..With some of you..it is a loose loose situation..

Mac


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Rattus, that sounds reasonable. Now, can you show me a definition of Traditional Style Bowhunting that applies to all Traditional Bowhunters? If none exist, then all styles fit the bill, every persons. Sure, we don't need my target endeavors in the forum, and we don't need to know about the latest scores, or the latest events, but that ain't talking "style", that's talking target stuff. If my style is how I shoot, it should fit. And if someone asks about "style" that works best, and I learned it from a book, it fits the bill. BTW, so would yours.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Sanford said:


> Rattus, that sounds reasonable. Now, can you show me a definition of Traditional Style Bowhunting that applies to all Traditional Bowhunters? If none exist, then all styles fit the bill, every persons. Sure, we don't need my target endeavors in the forum, and we don't need to know about the latest scores, or the latest events, but that ain't talking "style", that's talking target stuff. If my style is how I shoot, it should fit. And if someone asks about "style" that works best, and I learned it from a book, it fits the bill. BTW, so would yours.


I've already spelled that out.... longbow, recurve and variants.... What is difficult about that. Now of course, you're going to say if hunting with an olympic style rig would qualify, or silk tux shirts, or gps, or a kindle, or.......... and you can "rule out" anything.... why don't you focus on the salient word... BOWHUNTING... and the relevant one for ME... TRADITIONAL STYLE. So if you come in with your compound bow with a hunting question are you going to be asked to leave?? Not by me... but if you start asking for cam timing questions, I might be prompted to ask if that wouldn't be more appropriate on a bowhunting forum or compound forum rather than one for stickbows...


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

rattus58 said:


> I've already spelled that out.... longbow, recurve and variants.... What is difficult about that. Now of course, you're going to say if hunting with an olympic style rig would qualify, or silk tux shirts, or gps, or a kindle, or.......... and you can "rule out" anything.... why don't you focus on the salient word... BOWHUNTING... and the relevant one for ME... TRADITIONAL STYLE. So if you come in with your compound bow with a hunting question are you going to be asked to leave?? Not by me... but if you start asking for cam timing questions, I might be prompted to ask if that wouldn't be more appropriate on a bowhunting forum or compound forum rather than one for stickbows...


Rattus, what happened to inclusive/exclusive? The word of focus should be Bowhunting, yes. Now, if a guy came in with an vintage Bear Whitetail, well, he might have had two forums here at AT to have chose from. Granted, he would not be shooting a 2012 Widow, but to ask him to leave? Is that the way for me and my bows that don't look "traditional" too? Could he not be redirected to give him a choice of what suits him if he thinks he is working his own traditional style, or maybe he was just confused and didn't know there was an established rule on what Traditional Bowhunter was - even if it has never been defined but individually. 

In all the past discussion here, it has always seemed opinion wise that to try to define Traditional was the antithesis of what a traditional shooter was all about. Now, folks seem more than willing to accept whatever as long as they get can a bowhunting forum.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

ratus - I don't care what scoring system any club uses - I will shoot no matter what they use.

Regarding Mac's last post - that nonsense has firmed my resolution to no longer address this with him - he sites exactly what that there are no "no shot scenarios" at any IBO shoot - and then complains that this is not realistic - and in the previous post he complains that there are no-shot scenarios.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Sanford said:


> Rattus, what happened to inclusive/exclusive? The word of focus should be Bowhunting, yes. Now, if a guy came in with an early Bear Whitetail, well, he might have had two forums here at AT to have chose from. Granted, he would not be shooting a 2012 Widow, but to ask him to leave? Could he not be redirected to give him a choice of what suits him if he thinks he is working his own traditional style, or maybe he was just confused and didn't know there was an established rule on what Traditional Bowhunter was - even if it has never been defined but individually.
> 
> In all the past discussion here, it has always seemed opinion wise that to try to define Traditional was the antithesis of what a traditional shooter was all about. Now, folks seem more than willing to accept whatever as long as they get can a bowhunting forum.


What is your point Sanford? No one to my knowledge has accepted my definition of Traditional Style.... but that is exactly how I look at it... and so you are saying that being inclusive is now a BAD THING??? You guys are unreal. Oh... and we are a TRADITIONAL Archery forum going in aren't we... and this would be a subforum... would it not... and you are continuing to parse. I don't give a tinkers damn what YOU ARE INTERESTED IN... sanford... get that point solidly affixed in your psyche. It is what I'M interested in that moves my vote for a bowhunting sub-forum to this forum. Bowhunting... and by the way.. show me where I would be exclusive?


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

I do think a scoring system that penalized a miss would be more accurate and promote good shooting decisions, but these are shoots, and people go to have fun. If a person witholds most of their shots to play it safe, it won't be as fun. We would then have targets placed 10 to 20 yards so that the majority of people could take shots without averaging a negative. I see the point, and agree with much of it, but challenging shots can be fun. Most 3d target shoots i go to have many shots that i wouldn't take at a live animal, none of them IBO, by the way. I still enjoy them. If somebody habitually gets a wound at a 3d. Shoots, and then is stupid enough to say, "i can hit it when it really counts." I don't blame the target competition, anymore than i blame the government for me getting fat. I'd like to try a shoot with a punitive scoring system for the variety, but calling anything else unethical is kind of a stretch, in my opinion.


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

rattus58 said:


> I don't give a tinkers damn what YOU ARE INTERESTED IN... sanford... get that point solidly affixed in your psyche.


Sure, not mine or anybody else but your needs. I had that pegged from the start. I have not expressed my needs, just my ability to express them without being told to leave.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Sanford said:


> Me or anybody else but your needs. I had that pegged from the start.


 Exactly Sanford... my vote is FOR ME AND ME ALONE. Do I think that a bowhunting sub-forum that segregates bowhunting threads from the dozens of superfluous threads on aiming, endless debate on terms, target archery, limbsavers, etc, but that focuses on bowhunting EXCLUSIVELY... or as much as possible if exclusive isn't possible in some circumstance... such as... would 3D be helpful in determinging bowhunting shots... etc. would be a good thing? Absolutely!

It would/could, among other things, actually attract those that some of you would prefer go somewhere else to talk traditional bowhunting, to Archery Talk.. or is it that you don't want new subscribers?

I'm glad you had me pegged Sanford.. I speak for myself... Who do YOU speak for?


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

You know, I was fairly ambivalent about the separate category, but this thread has convinced me that at this time, it should not have that category. I think that the category might be appropriate if it is simply what people want, but right now it's more about some posters avoiding certain other posters than discussing a common interest. 

It would seem that a very many of us on either side of these arguments could learn from pre-school and take a time out, learn how to take another person's comment and press for clarification instead of retaliation. I see a lot of arguments where it doesn't actually look like there is a necessary disagreement, but rather, one or both or all parties either get hung up on nailing their point home, being right, proving the other person wrong, getting offended, justifying being offended, whatever. 

I truly don't believe that this would go on if we were talking face to face. We can still be kids, but let's be big kids. We get to play with big kid toys. Let's reflect our privileges with our behavior towards each other. There isn't a regular poster here I don't respect, and in some way, admire. I think if we back off from what we _think_ is going on and learned to listen, most all of us would feel the same.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

BarneySlayer said:


> You know, I was fairly ambivalent about the separate category, but this thread has convinced me that at this time, it should not have that category. I think that the category might be appropriate if it is simply what people want, but right now it's more about some posters avoiding certain other posters than discussing a common interest.
> 
> It would seem that a very many of us on either side of these arguments could learn from pre-school and take a time out, learn how to take another person's comment and press for clarification instead of retaliation. I see a lot of arguments where it doesn't actually look like there is a necessary disagreement, but rather, one or both or all parties either get hung up on nailing their point home, being right, proving the other person wrong, getting offended, justifying being offended, whatever.
> 
> I truly don't believe that this would go on if we were talking face to face. We can still be kids, but let's be big kids. We get to play with big kid toys. Let's reflect our privileges with our behavior towards each other. There isn't a regular poster here I don't respect, and in some way, admire. I think if we back off from what we _think_ is going on and learned to listen, most all of us would feel the same.


It is what people want.... :grin: There are a fair number of us who come here as bowhunters who are primarily interested in bowhunting ONLY... like me and I know several others. If you want to cite bickering... it is that very fact that screams for a separate bowhunting sub-forum with traditional equipment. I don't care, and most bowhunters don't give a whit about whether you aim with split vision or gap or whatnot... they want to know how you shot your deer, tracked it, whether that form of whatever you use for aiming sent your lighted nock properly through the animal... that might have been moving... eating... semi alert... rather than sitting broadside at peace with itself waiting for your arrow... in a 3D shoot.

This thread alone had generated over 3000 views... the other over 4000... you think that there is NO INTEREST in having a sub-forum for bowhunting that is bereft of all the associated threads that we have to wade through to find something of interest? Bowhunting IS my interest. If it is not yours, how does it affect you that I don't have to click on a thread to see what or whether it has interest for me?

Aloha... :beer:


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Rattus, I speak for myself and anyone else here that wants any new visitor here to find helpful information and not be confused as to the goal of this place. If disaggregation of the topics listed helps them find what they want faster and better, I'm for that. 

If that means a creation of two separate camps at odds but under one tent, two ideologies totally different in goal other than one is just about hunting and one is not, then no way.

If there is disunity, let it be all under one umbrella or move one to a whole new section on AT and call it by what name that will support it. Otherwise, any newcomer here will be confused as heck as to the function of this place. Again, hunting topics are hunting topics. That's easy. Shooting topics are not hunting or target topics, they are archery topics, and should be open to all's input.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

rattus58 said:


> If you want to cite bickering... it is that very fact that screams for a separate bowhunting sub-forum with traditional equipment. I don't care, and most bowhunters don't give a whit about whether you aim with split vision or gap or whatnot... they want to know how you shot your deer, tracked it, whether that form of whatever you use for aiming sent your lighted nock properly through the animal... that might have been moving... eating... semi alert... rather than sitting broadside at peace with itself waiting for your arrow... in a 3D shoot......
> 
> you think that there is NO INTEREST in having a sub-forum for bowhunting that is bereft of all the associated threads that we have to wade through to find something of interest? Bowhunting IS my interest. If it is not yours, how does it affect you that I don't have to click on a thread to see what or whether it has interest for me?
> 
> Aloha... :beer:


The above mentioned sounds great.

_That last_ part is a great justification, simply as a filter of content. I would visit it regularly to learn on the topic. As most all of this interests me, in terms of actual content, I don't really care if the filter is there or not. Personally, it would be easier if it weren't. One less section to skim. But, if you think it may actually encourage content from people who would otherwise not want to post in the larger bucket, I would support that idea.

Regardless, i think the entire forum would benefit from more listening, less reacting.

Aloha... :beer: back at you!


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

sharpbroadhead said:


> ratus - I don't care what scoring system any club uses - I will shoot no matter what they use.
> 
> Regarding Mac's last post - that nonsense has firmed my resolution to no longer address this with him - he sites exactly what that there are no "no shot scenarios" at any IBO shoot - and then complains that this is not realistic - and in the previous post he complains that there are no-shot scenarios.


Ken..honestly...come on...

You made the statement I was slandering...remember..I merely showed there are other viable alternatives..done at other types of shoots..and pointed out what the Ibo's rules are..to those here that did not understand what 1 point I was trying to make.

The problem here is not just 1 issue..or 1 opinion and certainly not just 1 way to look at things..but many and until you are willing to accept this you will take every bit of criticism presented as a personal affront to yourself..and what you like or dislike.

Another issue is folks including yourself and Sanford saying this...

Sanford first..since it is most recent..



> I have not expressed my needs, just my ability to express them without being told to leave.


No one has told you you have to leave...have they ? This sub-forum is not a reality...and yet..some like yourself are under the impression of what the rules will be or not be..Why...? 

Sharp..your turn..I missed your post where you said this..and I apologize..



> Mac - I hate to tell you this - but I would love to see a penalty on hits outside the vitals - but then - if that were to happen - traditional archery would really be in trouble - as many if not most would score a negative score - and then the calls for ethics would land right in your lap! After such poor scores would expose the poor level of accuracy by the majority of traditional shooters - I am certian that we would see proficiency tests in order to prove that you are effective with your weapon - and this would without a doubt be the end of traditional bowhunting as we know it. A hunter can wound and miss many many animals and he is the only one who knows it - but when there is scores kept and when you are shooting with others - you cannot hide it.


Your 100% correct...you can not hide poor shooting if there is a different scoring method used..Bow Hunting is ETHICS FIRST..and I am not meaning what type of bow you shoot..if you are sitting on top of a feeder..sitting 30 feet up in a tree..spot & stalk hunting..or wither you use a primitive bow or a modern bow..This isn't the part of ethics I am discussing or talking about..but the very core ethics we all should have whenever we take a shot at a animal.Should it land in our laps...dear god Ken...it already has...and it is only get worse if we don't change somethings and reinforce when to shoot..and when not to shoot.Putting the animal above our own need to win..



> The vast majority of trad shooters cannot manage to average a vital hit on every target now and that is with taking five points for hits outside the vitals - with no score for fives or better yet a penalty of a negative score for hits outside hte vitals the scores would be so horrible that I have no doubt that the calls for proficiency tests would be made.


That is a distinct possibility..and one to be worried about..So...how can we improve and keep this from happening...? Maybe something like I have been suggesting...making all of these shoots more realistic to what a hunter may encounter in the feild ?



> do you think that the vast majority of trad hunters could put 6 out of 6 arrows in the vitals of say a whitetail at say 20 yards if their hunting license depended on it? I suspect that the vast majority would give up trad and go to compounds and then the big shops would stop carrying trad, the trad only shops would go out of business, etc...


I don't know...I suspect many could...and those that can't..won't be granted a license to hunt..Would this be the most ethical way..? Strictly on a ethical stand point..yes.. Would this way of doing thing ensure that no bow hunter will ever have to fight for the right to hunt with his bow again..? Will this stop all of those organizations from ever starting court cases to eliminate hunting different species not on the endangered species act ? If the answer is yes...then I could only pray that it get enacted today.. If no..then no..I wouldn't vote for it..Is this fair to those who can not put 6 for 6 in the vitals of a deer target at 20 yards..in the short term...no...in the long term...yes...because it would have secured our rights forever and those countless other bow hunters rights anywhere in this country...and be a model for all nations.



> And where do you come up with this stuff about no shot scenarios - there are no no shot scenarios at any 3D shoot I have ever attended and the IBO goes out of their way to make sure every shot is a broadside shot with the entire target visible


Sure...some do..and some don't..and there are no standardized ways for these competitions either except by the ibo rules and just why are all of the vitals opened without obstruction Ken ? I know..and have said why..but another question for you.. is why..? The answer is what I have maintained...it is because they don't want it to interfere with the scoring..not for teaching tool..which a person wanting to learn how to hunt actually needs to see and practice...remember Ken...you have told members here a IBO shoot is a place to learn how to hunt...

While we don't see eye to eye on every issue about this..I refuse to close my mind to what you and others say..Your opinion does matter..and I can learn from you and others..I'm not that old..or set in my ways that I can't appreciate what you have to say Ken..and you too Sanford..all I ask is you give what I have to say..and what my opinions are the same respect and consideration..

Mac


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Sanford said:


> If disaggregation of the topics listed helps them find what they want faster and better, I'm for that.
> 
> If that means a creation of two separate camps at odds but under one tent, two ideologies totally different in goal other than one is just about hunting and one is not, then no way.


:thumbs_up:cocktail:


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Sanford said:


> Rattus, I speak for myself and anyone else here that wants any new visitor here to find helpful information and not be confused as to the goal of this place. If disaggregation of the topics listed helps them find what they want faster and better, I'm for that.
> 
> If that means a creation of two separate camps at odds but under one tent, two ideologies totally different in goal other than one is just about hunting and one is not, then no way.
> 
> If there is disunity, let it be all under one umbrella or move one to a whole new section on AT and call it by what name that will support it. Otherwise, any newcomer here will be confused as heck as to the function of this place. Again, hunting topics are hunting topics. That's easy. *Shooting topics are not hunting or target topics, they are archery topics, and should be open to all's input*.


So how would a bowhunting sub-forum change that?


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

MAC 11700 said:


> Sanford first..since it is most recent..
> 
> No one has told you you have to leave...have they ? This sub-forum is not a reality...and yet..some like yourself are under the impression of what the rules will be or not be..Why...?
> 
> Mac


You would if you could, if you had the mechanism, if it was provided for, as my views would not fit yours as you expressed them concerning your 1 issue. That's a worthy point to worry about. If you had been on the receiving end of a vengeful and opinionated member turned moderator, you would understand that anything is possible around here.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

As far as I'm concerned....Mac just made an honest effort to express himself respectfully and an honest attempt in trying to understand oppossing opinions in his last post.

:thumbs_up

Ray :shade:


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

BLACK WOLF said:


> As far as I'm concerned....Mac just made an honest effort to express himself respectfully and an honest attempt in trying to understand oppossing opinions in his last post.
> 
> :thumbs_up
> 
> Ray :shade:


Mac gets a high five!


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Sanford said:


> You would if you could, if you had the mechanism, if it was provided for. That's a worthy point to worry about.


 No its not... The only reason to ask you post somewhere else is if you insist on posting non-bowhunting stuff... or are otherwise in distemper.... how could you or I ask anyone to leave? Stop being so negative sanford, this is about bowhunting with traditional equipment... and no I don't want to get into ANOTHER agurment with you as to what is traditional... you know it when you see it.... even kegans horny bow would be welcome... think about something positive for a change... this would be a positive for this site.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Kegan has a horny bow? That's just not right :zip:


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

deleted


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

Sanford said:


> You would if you could, if you had the mechanism, if it was provided for, as my views would not fit yours as you expressed them concerning your 1 issue. That's a worthy point to worry about. If you had been on the receiving end of a vengeful and opinionated member turned moderator, you would understand that anything is possible around here.


Perhaps that would happen ...but I have more faith in the admin here than you do that they will chose someone that can see both sides to any argument and moderate in a appropriate fashion ...

Mac


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

sharpbroadhead said:


> Kegan has a horny bow? That's just not right :zip:


 :grin: don't what else to callit.... gots all kind of extensions .... :grin:


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

MAC 11700 said:


> Perhaps that would happen ...but I have more faith in the admin here than you do that they will chose someone that can see both sides to any argument and moderate in a appropriate fashion ...
> 
> Mac


Any discussion on you possibly being the moderator of that forum?


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

oh boy


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

Sanford said:


> Any discussion on you possibly being the moderator of that forum?


I have no clue who will be the mod...or even if one will be needed..but would if asked ..and regardless what some feel ..I do know how to be fair ..I'm not ignorant in this regard .There is a big difference and responsibility in being a mod vs being just a member. 

Mac


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

MAC 11700 said:


> Perhaps that would happen ...but I have more faith in the admin here than you do that they will chose someone that can see both sides to any argument and moderate in a appropriate fashion ...
> 
> Mac



I say *JINKSTER *and *Photoguy* should co-moderate the new forum.

That should keep it running smooth.

:wink:


KPC


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Dewey3 said:


> No offense to anyone else, but Ray (Black Wolf) and Hank would be very good at a moderation job.


Thanks for the consideration Dewey...but I really wouldn't want that job. I think Simon's doing a great job. He's at least making an effort to make this the best trad archery forum around and isn't being self centered or heavy handed while doing it.

Ray :shade:


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

Against my better judgement:

1. Doesn’t AT already have a bowhunting forum? How many possible topics for discussion can there be that are exclusive to bowhunting with a stickbow and do not involve how to actually shoot a bow (you know, that techy-targeteer stuff)?

2. What exactly constitutes an unethical _target_? It’s a TARGET, right? I went to a 3D shoot where they had those baby dinosaur targets. Do those get the Quality Dinosaur Management folks in a snit? How about that mosquito targets? They’re too big. How will I ever learn to swat those things when the targets aren’t even realistic? If I run up screaming and blast that thing with a can of Deep Woods Off do I automatically get 11 points? Or can I add up all the rings and take 34? Wait…you mean they’re _targets_? Oh well. Nevermind.

3. If a person can’t tell the difference between shooting at a hunk of foam shaped like a deer and a _real_ deer, I hope they don’t run across the old Road Runner cartoons on television. Darwinism would be rampant. As a side note: just because Bugs Bunny can stick his finger down the barrel of a shotgun and make it blow up in Elmer Fudd’s face doesn’t mean you can too. 

4. My three- and six-year-old neices don't get their feelings hurt as easily as some of the "adults" on this forum. Lighten up. Life’s too short to get cranked up over silliness like this.


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

if anyone ever needed evidence that archers are a strange crew , just show them this thread ...

11 Pages on why we should make two different topic and possibly divisive sub forum headings , so that the very few people who participate in a sport that, world wide is about as popular as arctic skinny dipping compared to most other sports, don't hurt each others feelings ...


----------



## tjandy (Jun 10, 2005)

Seems that the masses want to leave it as it is. :thumb: 
On another note, we currently are not adding any new moderators.

Thread closed 

Thanks everyone for your input, much appreciated.

tj


----------

