# An open question to the I/A shooters on this forum...



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

It is my understanding that the I/A forum was established to be an area where serious competitive archers with some real time under their belts could commune with each other and assist each other through some tough shooting issues we all face from time to time and perhaps increase our overall performance potential in the process.

A year later the site is riddled with threads such as "scopes magnification", "state records", "...form check up", "draw weight for indoors and outdoors", etc. none of which I would place in the category of even being intermediate. Moderation has become lax (nothing personal, Mahly you do have a life outside of AT) and if anyone openly recommends that a thread be moved, then they are taken to the cleaners by those making those types of posts, those who continually answer them, or the novices frequenting this site for a free ride from the more experienced members (how many times has someone stated they posted their beginner question here only because of the perceived higher level of experience). How is this supposed to assist or be an asset for the serious competitive archer??

The novice archer already has sub forums on AT such as gen pop, coaches corner, arrows & strings, and the tuning forums to learn about the things they are posting about in a forum that was originally designed specifically for the more advanced archer. Very few I/A members who frequent this forum ask for advice about a shooting or mental issue they may be having because who wants to open themselves up to receiving feedback from someone who has only been shooting for a few months who would tell them to download N&B tuning guide or read "With Winning in Mind" or rattle off something else that they had read in a book or online? 

So, what can we, as the I/A archers this forum was originally designed for, do to reorient it so that it closely mirrors its original purpose? Thank you!!


----------



## oldpro888 (Dec 31, 2010)

montigre said:


> It is my understanding that the I/A forum was established to be an area where serious competitive archers with some real time under their belts could commune with each other and assist each other through some tough shooting issues we all face from time to time and perhaps increase our overall performance potential in the process.
> 
> A year later the site is riddled with threads such as "scopes magnification", "state records", "...form check up", "draw weight for indoors and outdoors", etc. none of which I would place in the category of even being intermediate. Moderation has become lax (nothing personal, Mahly you do have a life outside of AT) and if anyone openly recommends that a thread be moved, then they are taken to the cleaners by those making those types of posts, those who continually answer them, or the novices frequenting this site for a free ride from the more experienced members (how many times has someone stated they posted their beginner question here only because of the perceived higher level of experience). How is this supposed to assist or be an asset for the serious competitive archer??
> 
> ...


Your arrogance may be short sighted. One of the " novice " posts you put down was from me. Many of the top shooters on here know me. I have more years shooting professionally than nearly anyone on here has been alive. Won State titles in 5 States. I can go on about podiums but that's not why I am posting this.

My scope question was to gain opinion of others who actually know, I see the people on this sight really know what they are talking about, not a group you are trying to criticize. 
I seldom change anything outside of the new bow I get in the mail. Asked to shoot a new scope, and had a simple question that was answered. 

So to answer your question, the answer to my post as an accomplished serious archer was very nicely answered. 

And remember, I paid the same for posting this as you do.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## barnold1 (Oct 28, 2011)

What kind of score in 5-spot would typically distinguish the breakpoint between being considered a novice and an intermediate?


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

Not a shred of arrogance intended and I am sorry you took it that way. I have actually enjoyed reading your shooting posts for the past couple of years.

The inclusion of the post you made was not to indicate that you were a novice, but to simply use it as one example of many of the types of novice questions that were originally supposed to be redirected to a more appropriate sub forum when this forum was established.


----------



## oldpro888 (Dec 31, 2010)

barnold1 said:


> What kind of score in 5-spot would typically distinguish the breakpoint between being considered a novice and an intermediate?


My opinion would be 300. We have 3 guys in our Thursday night league that do it every week.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## oldpro888 (Dec 31, 2010)

montigre said:


> Not a shred of arrogance intended and I am sorry you took it that way. I have actually enjoyed reading your shooting posts for the past couple of years.
> 
> The inclusion of the post you made was not to indicate that you were a novice, but to simply use it as one example of many of the types of novice questions that were originally supposed to be redirected to a more appropriate sub forum when this forum was established.


Glad I misread your intentions. I just skip over those posts you refer to. All is good


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

To answer the question that was asked, it can't be kept to those standards without being more heavily moderated. It has to start there and it has to be moderated with that specific goal in mind.


----------



## ILOVE3D (Feb 4, 2009)

I read far more post then I ever post on and I skip over many other "beginner" post's as well. I frequently get ideas and tips to try from a select bunch of those that post on here. Many of which I don't post on but try things out to see if they can help me better my scores. I think that shooting a 300 on a 5 spot is a good indication of an intermediate shooter but who is going to police this and how would you suggest they go about it. I have in the past I'm sure asked about scope magnification on here when I first went from a slider sight without a lens to a scope and that was to perhaps save me some money rather than purchase one of several different powers. I might add that I was able to shoot a 300 on a 5 spot before going to a scope with a lens that just created new problems and my scores actually went down at first. I'm still looking for tips and different practice ideas so someday I will shoot a 300 on a Vegas face during competition. Just recently I have done it at home during practice but went to Vegas last week and with catching a cold and other physical limitations at this time I fell apart. Maybe next year! I thank you Gail and the rest of you that are willing to share your knowledge whether I'm the one asking or a thread by some one else. You guys are the ones that make this forum special!


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

Here we go again.....

DM


----------



## N7709K (Dec 17, 2008)

I've always seen the "intermediate" denomination differently and viewed it from a competition standpoint; to be competitive you need a 300 average, and to be "intermediate" you need a 55x avg or so... but with the group at large that sets the bar unfairly high for the majority; and with the outcry against using score averages as denotation of skillset it doesn't work for the group in this sub forum. That said...

I think that a fair portion of the threads that may seem beginner level can bring high level discussions about the finite points of the topic... but only to a point; at a certain level it becomes less about theory and more about time behind the bow and the relationship built between shooter and their gear. There is a point when certain information can be given or withheld based upon the level that the shooter receiving the information is at; there are shortcuts and tricks that if given or i should say implemented at the wrong time will hinder the progression instead of advancing it... 

I haven't been active for a whole list of reasons... and it will more than likely stay that way for the same reasons...


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

N7709K said:


> There is a point when certain information can be given or withheld based upon the level that the shooter receiving the information is at...


The whole reason for starting the sub forum in the first place. ^^^^^^

Knowing where someone is at in their shooting is a good thing, for both the advice giver and the receiver.


----------



## RCR_III (Mar 19, 2011)

Personally, and this will ruffle some feathers, I think it should be shut down. 

This argument/discussion, this will always be forethought in a group of member's minds who frequent this sub forum. No amount of moderation, self inflicted or distributed among an official moderator or group of official moderators, will ever suffice as to what a group of members here want. 

They will withhold the principles they stand up and above the crowd, and they will take it upon theirselves to look down at the majority with noses turned up. 

The best justice to this sub forum, as I see it, is to close it and start over. Start over with a "Target" sub forum. No I&A designation, as this has become a muddled, who's arrow is bigger contest. 

From what I've gathered, there's already a secret society of members, in their own private group, that can relish in their, "I'm superior" attitudes. So leave the I&A, that some hope for, to that. It can be moderated by who joins the group as to the conversations you'd like to take part in. 

What Archery Talk needs is a sub forum for Target Archery. Not a sub forum that is trying to be an elitist group that funnels me pm's by members with legitimate questions, saying they are not wanting to post in here because of fear of being flamed. 

Let me give you a minute to re read that last sentence. 

Fear... Of posting. Yea, that's what the archery community needs as a whole. 

And I've heard the argument made by the same members that fight for elitism that this sub forum isn't about the community. But yes, yes it is. Because the community visits, or used to at least, to gain knowledge of target archery topics. 

So again, take the elitism attitude to your own private group and allow this sub forum to be closed and replaced with a Target Archery sub forum. No elitism there, just target archery talks. In fact, I'd prefer the new sub forum to have moderation to keep that type of negative behavior out. 

Will this happen, maybe not. I know I've knocked my head up against a wall trying for it in the past. But then again, the world needs people to keep trying and to stand up for what they believe in. Maybe going to different sources in the future may help. 

For those that have read my entire post, this is what I have to say on this matter. It's nothing new from me. Nor will it probably ever change due to what I've been privileged to see here. And this is as far as my posting and comments will go based on this matter in this thread, so please feel free to comment your own personal opinions based on my post, it's welcomed, but I will not be replying and getting dragged down through it. 

It takes too much of my time, mentally and physically, to peck away at this type of bang your head against the wall argument here in the trenches. I'd much rather talk proactively with members of the group who manage AT as a whole to get things sorted out. 

Which is the group I more so intended this post to be read by. The group of Admins and Moderators of AT as a whole who can go to the correct source for change.


----------



## GRIMWALD (Sep 28, 2012)

rcr_iii said:


> personally, and this will ruffle some feathers, i think it should be shut down.
> 
> This argument/discussion, this will always be forethought in a group of member's minds who frequent this sub forum. No amount of moderation, self inflicted or distributed among an official moderator or group of official moderators, will ever suffice as to what a group of members here want.
> 
> ...


x2 

GRIM


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

montigre said:


> So, what can we, as the I/A archers this forum was originally designed for, do to reorient it so that it closely mirrors its original purpose? Thank you!!


I'll say it again, as I do each time this comes up: Don't read the posts that disagree with you all or from the posters you all feel are beneath you. Setup a filter or ignore list or something - you got a computer, it's a marvelous, high tech tool with scroll buttons and automation tools galore, so use it to your advantage. AT doesn't need to contort itself 3 times a day just to suit you every instant someone says something you didn't like - it's the other way around. Just learn how to tolerate posts that you don't agree with and people that you'd rather not listen to. It's difficult, but a simple thing to learn to do. That's just life. Adjust to it. Simple as that.

DM


----------



## equilibrium (Oct 31, 2006)

I think everyone needs to take a step back...........................................and buy a ILF bow. Then shoot it without sights. Use a, pick a point, gap or meat ball style of aiming. Then, when your at full draw and shooting a 77, 80 or a 101 yard target....trying to remember which leaf, branch, dark spot or whatever, that's 10 to 16 feet over the top of the target. Then, you drop in a 16 or 18. (if lucky) Then when you read most of the things posted here you will come to the same thoughts as RCR III has. It's all water off a ducks back. IMHO.

"From what I've gathered, there's already a secret society of members, in their own private group, that can relish in their, "I'm superior" attitudes. So leave the I&A, that some hope for, to that. It can be moderated by who joins the group as to the conversations you'd like to take part in." * Where? *


----------



## equilibrium (Oct 31, 2006)

P.S. I love Taos, Chama, Red River, Jemez Springs and Sadie's in ABQ.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

equilibrium said:


> I think everyone needs to take a step back...........................................and buy a ILF bow.


Post of the year. There's no n00b repellant quite like an oly recurve with a clicker on it. Highly recommended when ya start feelin' a little uppity... 

DM


----------



## Shogun1 (Jan 31, 2015)

montigre said:


> It is my understanding that the I/A forum was established to be an area where serious competitive archers with some real time under their belts could commune with each other and assist each other through some tough shooting issues we all face from time to time and perhaps increase our overall performance potential in the process.
> 
> A year later the site is riddled with threads such as "scopes magnification", "state records", "...form check up", "draw weight for indoors and outdoors", etc. none of which I would place in the category of even being intermediate. Moderation has become lax (nothing personal, Mahly you do have a life outside of AT) and if anyone openly recommends that a thread be moved, then they are taken to the cleaners by those making those types of posts, those who continually answer them, or the novices frequenting this site for a free ride from the more experienced members (how many times has someone stated they posted their beginner question here only because of the perceived higher level of experience). How is this supposed to assist or be an asset for the serious competitive archer??
> 
> ...


Ok, I'll bite on your bait. Three basic questions follow. Two address how readers should react to posts. One addresses whether posters should be screened out -- by the system (moderators or some automated criteria) or by themselves.

Is your point that when someone posts an inappropriate question -- too basic or a novice level question -- participants in this form should ignore that post until it is moved to a more appropriate area of the forum?

Or is the point if the readers of this forum think that the OP of a thread doesn't meet the threshold criteria for participating in this forum, then they (the readers of the forum) should ignore the post?

Or is the point that posters should be self policing and determine if they really are "serious competitive archers WITH some real time under their belts"?

What constitutes serious competitive archers? Apparently some arbitrary score in a specific venue. And if that venue is inapplicable -- then don't post. For example, if your primary focus is an NFAA 900 round, and you don't shoot 300s wih 55x or better on a 20 yard 5 spot -- then don't post.

Real time? Measured in seconds, minutes, hours, months, years, or decades? Or is the measurement really about arbitrary experiences? Winning national titles in multiple venues? Placing in national competitions? Participating in national competitions?
Ask the same questions but roll it down to state level competitions or club level competitions.


----------



## erdman41 (May 6, 2009)

Well I'm the one along with Casey and a few others that set up this not secret at all group. I've been very quiet about it in this forum. I rarely post in here at all anyway. I had high hopes for this forum when it started out but pretty much knew what the ultimate result would be.

However I do take exception to the elitist claim that is being thrown around now. It's really easy to throw out that claim when one is excluded from a group. Harder to look in the mirror and be honest why you are not in that group. Funny thing is how many of the regulars in here set up alters and asked to join this elitist group.

There is some good information in this forum and a lot of the same old garbage that gets repeated and repeated by people who have never experienced what they are talking about.

This "secret" group can be read by anyone. To join you have to be referred by one of the current members or just ask and are evaluated on a case by case basis. We have currently 29 members that have a wide range of age and skill level. One thing in common with them is they are open and honest about it. This helps both the people seeking advice and the people giving advice. We have a "Who are you" thread that I think is fantastic. Give your real name and what level you are at based off of your scores. After all a competition is based off of scores. Harder to be a keyboard hero when your real name is on it. Also easy to look up state organizations and see the persons name with their score next to it. That's called accountability.

Archery Talk has helped me become a better archer over the years and it has caused this same progression to be slower than it needs to be. I was hoping this forum would end that same cycle that so many others have gone through. This is one of the goals of this "secret group".

Moderating the group has been non existent. Have quality, respectful, non anonymous people and it is self moderated. We probably don't have near the number of posts going on in here and that is fine by me. Quality over quantity. Besides our group members are probably more likely behind a string somewhere than behind a keyboard.

Good luck to you all and especially Mahly!!


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

Shogun1 said:


> Ok, I'll bite on your bait. Three basic questions follow.


No baiting going on here, just asking the I/A shooters who frequent this forum for honest and objective opinions on how they feel the I/A forum should proceed. Are the 3 questions you raised addressed to the intended group?


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

dmacey said:


> Post of the year. There's no n00b repellant quite like an oly recurve with a clicker on it. Highly recommended when ya start feelin' a little uppity...
> 
> DM


"Uppity"... Hmm, kind of like that term... could refer to someone educated beyond their skillset  we seem to get a lot of that around here.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

I'll go with the elitist angle. Why not? I have no shame in discussing the countless hours spent pounding out results on paper. That's where being competitive is measured, in results. People can theorize the crap out of just about every aspect of this sport and sound just as intelligent as the last cut and paste expert, but at the end of the day, if you can't put it on paper, you really should look in the mirror and decide whether you should be giving advice that you can not see the benefit from yourself. Perhaps you don't understand as well as you believe you do. I think everyone would agree that it takes a lot of time and hard work to get results. But where does that leave you if you have put in a tremendous amount of both with poor results? Well from what I've seen it leaves a pile of excuses and the migration towards tuning issues or physical limitations as reasons why you've never seen the fruits of your labors. It is what it is. 

This is not a peer group as it was proposed. That's fine. I think those of us wanting that have found a better means to that end. I think RCR is right in that it should be directed more towards the beginner looking for what diopter lens to start out with, or the best string color for a purple target bow. There is more demand for that stuff anyway. It would be better for those of us assuming a more relevant purpose to accept it for what it is. But it should be changed in title, so that those requesting more advanced information aren't led to believe that they are receiving quality information from a select group of elite archers.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Again, I would suggest looking at the questions asked more than the person asking the question.
Yes, for some subjects, experience counts a lot. For others, it can be a VERY good question for advanced shooters, asked from someone who is new to the sport.

Yes, the definition of Int-Adv Competition is relative. Among elite level shooters, that's going to be in the 299+ average range on a vegas target.
At the state level, you might be looking at a 297 shooter as a top level shooter.
Looking at the results for a state championship, a guy shooting 5 spot averaging 56x would have been 3rd or 4th place. That would have to be defined as an advanced shooter in that state shoot. The low shooter was a 265 shooter on a 5 spot target. OK, we can call that a novice level competitor. Where does Int start? 1/2 way up? What if the shooter shoots a class other than unlimited freestyle? Bowhunter freestyle 1/2 way there is a 297 44x. Some would say that person should not be allowed to post here? 

What about local shoots? You can be top 3 at a BIG shoot. a 299 49x on a 5 spot target would have gotten you a gold medal at the Badger state games for Release bowhunter in 2013. (random tournament I looked up). Yet some small local shoots in the same area might require a 300 60x to win (my local club has a past Vegas winner, and a world champion and world cup gold medal winner).

To me, it's someone who can no longer be considered a Novice. But that Novice might even have the same question that an Intermediate shooter has... If the question has merit, it belongs here, even if the shooter is not a top level archer.

For those looking to only here from archers of a certain exact skill level or higher, feel free to start your own private group and then there is no wadding through the lesser shooters.

This forum in particular has about 4 threads a day that gets posts. I think that cutting the content much further would equate to 4 people looking at a blank screen (Remember the "Pro" forum. where you needed to provide credentials to post...1 thread in over a year where a couple guys said hello. End of forum)

There will ALWAYS be debate on what should fit here. And I welcome and encourage that debate. But know that those on both ends of that scale will never get exactly what they want.

We finally got a target gear and tuning forum (which is where about 1/2 of the new threads in this forum go) to clean up the gear issues, what remains is IMHO still the best forum to get/give advice/help/ideas to higher level shooters. I don't spend much time in Gen Pop anymore, but looking there....I think we got a pretty good thing going here.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

cbrunson said:


> I'll go with the elitist angle. Why not? I have no shame in discussing the countless hours spent pounding out results on paper. That's where being competitive is measured, in results. People can theorize the crap out of just about every aspect of this sport and sound just as intelligent as the last cut and paste expert, but at the end of the day, if you can't put it on paper, you really should look in the mirror and decide whether you should be giving advice that you can not see the benefit from yourself. Perhaps you don't understand as well as you believe you do. I think everyone would agree that it takes a lot of time and hard work to get results. But where does that leave you if you have put in a tremendous amount of both with poor results? Well from what I've seen it leaves a pile of excuses and the migration towards tuning issues or physical limitations as reasons why you've never seen the fruits of your labors. It is what it is.
> 
> This is not a peer group as it was proposed. That's fine. I think those of us wanting that have found a better means to that end. I think RCR is right in that it should be directed more towards the beginner looking for what diopter lens to start out with, or the best string color for a purple target bow. There is more demand for that stuff anyway. It would be better for those of us assuming a more relevant purpose to accept it for what it is. But it should be changed in title, so that those requesting more advanced information aren't led to believe that they are receiving quality information from a select group of elite archers.



As for ANSWERING questions, I have NO qualms about an accomplished archer letting others know that he can also walk the walk.
And those ASKING should be able to ask what level of shooter is giving advice. But that is for individuals to decide who they will listen to, and who to take with a grain of salt.
Post a very novice reply or one countering an accomplished shooter, and you better expect some scrutiny...doesn't mean you can't post it, but if you ARE posting in Int-Adv Comp, be prepared to back it up.


----------



## duc (Jul 18, 2009)

The so called "elite" sub forum is put together by like minded people who understand each other and can converse at their own level.(read into that what you want). It is in the main what some people think this forum should be. Nothing wrong with that. We pick and choose our friends in life for whatever reason, the sub forum is no different.


----------



## RCR_III (Mar 19, 2011)

Mahly, 

So why not just go ahead and petition the name change to just Target Archery or something similar and take the I&A nonsense out completely? It would put a stop to a lot of these threads where all that's discussed is who what or where can post. 

That would coincide with what you said about creating a group for others who would like to be a part of that group to have their platform. 

I think it would be a good update to a still young and evolving sub forum.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> But it should be changed in title, so that those requesting more advanced information aren't led to believe that they are receiving quality information from a select group of elite archers.


I don't agree. I see no reason for Mahly and AT to have to endlessly rewrite the site over and over to accommodate a "select" few who can't learn to use the search function or the scroll keys on their keyboard. It's up to the "elites" to do their _own_ due diligence in looking for the "advanced information" they need, not Mahly, AT or everybody else to chase them around trying to discern their every little whim. 

There's already a search function and up/down keys on your keyboards. You're "elites", so it should be well within your ability to learn to use them.

In my view, Mahly does an excellent job with what he has to work with and has well enough on his plate already - he shuts things down when they need shut down already and doesn't need to handhold every one of (rhetorical) you when you go "daddeeee! a n00b on I/A criticized me again!". And AT is already quite busy maintaining other aspects of the site. Leave them alone and let them do their jobs. Learn to use your tools yourself and use them. 

I say leave it alone and everyone read what they want and skip the rest.

DM


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

Mahly said:


> As for ANSWERING questions, I have NO qualms about an accomplished archer letting others know that he can also walk the walk.
> And those ASKING should be able to ask what level of shooter is giving advice. But that is for individuals to decide who they will listen to, and who to take with a grain of salt.
> Post a very novice reply or one countering an accomplished shooter, and you better expect some scrutiny...doesn't mean you can't post it, but if you ARE posting in Int-Adv Comp, be prepared to back it up.


With all due respect, I think most serious shooters have long given up on this sub-forum. It's no fault of yours specifically, but rather the notion of letting users dictate the direction it goes. 

Why would anyone want to go into the details of their individual accomplishments, only to end up in an argument with some old guy that read a lot of articles over the years but never actually learned from them? Or some guy that just comes here to play good guys and bad guys? It needs to be held to higher standards or it doesn't work.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

I'm betting we could get perfectly fine information on scope diopters in Gen Pop (honestly, that is a gear question, and was moved to target gear forum).
But this is still a place where we can discuss things important to competition archers other than gear.

Is it a little elitist? Some may say so, I say thats just how you make sub-forums. Are the bare bow guys elitist because they don't want to discuss lens diopters? Is the coaches corner elitist for not wanting to discuss what tree stand is best? Why are we elitist for not wanting to discuss those topics as well?

"But it should be changed in title, so that those requesting more advanced information aren't led to believe that they are receiving quality information from a select group of elite archers." 

The title is Intermediate-Advanced Competition, meaning you are just as likely to get information from an intermediate shooter as well as an Advanced shooter. Again, if you want to know your getting info from an advanced shooter, I encourage everyone to scrutinize where they are getting their information. That doesn't always mean the elite shooter has better information, but it gives one a form of measure to compare answers to.

The forum for elite shooters died from lack of activity. The private group seems to be going swimmingly. 
For those looking to only speak with elite shooters, I would suggest going that route. THIS forum is for Elite shooters, as well as guys finishing mid pack. Judge your responses accordingly.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

The issue has become, not who should or shouldn't post, but rather why should I? 

Do I want to write for the New York Times, or the National Enquirer?


----------



## N7709K (Dec 17, 2008)

cbrunson said:


> With all due respect, I think most serious shooters have long given up on this sub-forum. It's no fault of yours specifically, but rather the notion of letting users dictate the direction it goes.
> 
> Why would anyone want to go into the details of their individual accomplishments, only to end up in an argument with some old guy that read a lot of articles over the years but never actually learned from them? Or some guy that just comes here to play good guys and bad guys? It needs to be held to higher standards or it doesn't work.


This.


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

Mahly said:


> The title is Intermediate-Advanced Competition, meaning you are just as likely to get information from an intermediate shooter as well as an Advanced shooter. Again, if you want to know your getting info from an advanced shooter, I encourage everyone to scrutinize where they are getting their information. That doesn't always mean the elite shooter has better information, but it gives one a form of measure to compare answers to.
> 
> THIS forum is for Elite shooters, as well as guys finishing mid pack. Judge your responses accordingly.


I like this and it may help to smooth over some remaining rough bumps. Perhaps a means of allowing the readers to make these comparisons regarding the level of experience of the posters would be to request that all posters sign their names following their posts or place it in their signatures. If someone wishes to populate the I/A forum, then they should not object to a little more transparency regarding their identities as a means of cutting down on the shout downs that often occur by a few select members when opinions are expressed that differ from their own.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> With all due respect, I think most serious shooters have long given up on this sub-forum. It's no fault of yours specifically, but rather the notion of letting users dictate the direction it goes.


No. Your inability to extract the information you're looking for from this forum is _your_ problem, not Mahlys or anyone else's. You are the one who has to do your research and use your tools to obtain what you need. Your responsibility, not anyone else's.


> Why would anyone want to go into the details of their individual accomplishments, only to end up in an argument with some old guy that read a lot of articles over the years but never actually learned from them? Or some guy that just comes here to play good guys and bad guys? It needs to be held to higher standards or it doesn't work.


No, _you_ need to stop engaging in those arguments and fights. Nobody drags you into anything - you, and you alone, are the one who elects to get into those brawls with those "old guys" and other malcontents when they don't respond to your "details of their individual accomplishments" with the appropriate shock & awe. The handholding and coddling you're looking for is simply above Mahley's pay grade as well as everyone else here. It's not his job to manage your difficulties with using this site and gathering the information thats important to you. 

that's just life. Like I said, you have a wealth of tools available to you already, built into both your computer and this site, to gather the information you need. The site as-is is just fine and already contains an ocean of useful and "elite"-sourced information. Use them. It's no one else's responsibility but yours and yours alone.

DM


----------



## subconsciously (Aug 22, 2009)

I requested this sub forum over a year ago - I was just wanting discussion at a higher level than "What color strings do I get?" or Mathews vs. Hoyt. 

I like many do not come here for advice. I choose to help where I can. More of lately - it seems not so much. Seems like even when a good topic is started it gets drug in the mud. 

As long as this is a public forum and parameters are not set on who gives advice like the coaches corner http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=982320 - which is not followed anyway - your gonna get what you get.

The best part of AT is the classifieds. 


.02


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

dmacey, stop shouting people down again; cbrunson has as much right to express his opinion as you. Just because you may not agree with it, does not grant you blanket privilege to to become rude and argumentative toward him or any one else on this site.

Let's get back on topic....


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

montigre said:


> dmacey, stop shouting people down again;


Nobody is "shouting down" anyone (note the lack of all caps  ). All I'm doing is pointing out an attempted shifting of blame for someone's internal insecurity issues onto the rest of the group. How you perceive the demeanor of my commentary is your problem, not mine. Which is, of course, pretty much my entire point and has been in all the other repeats of this tiresome thread that just won't go away - If you're not getting what you need out of this group, that's not the group's problem. No one else is obligated to accommodate you. If that's difficult for you to hear and it sounds to you like "shouting", that's on you and only on you.

And your education is up to _you_, and _only_ you. That's just how it works in general.

DM


----------



## hrtlnd164 (Mar 22, 2008)

Sad to see where this forum seems to be headed. Unfortunately the ability to voice one's opinion while respecting someone else's opinion has gone to the way side. Another source of good information heading toward the crapper!


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

montigre said:


> cbrunson has as much right to express his opinion as you.


PS: nobody is denying anyone else's right to state his/her opinion. Replying to an opinion with "no, what you're saying is wrong" is _not_ equivalent to "you are not entitled to your opinion nor may you state it". I was merely telling cbrunson he was wrong (and gave my reasoning for it). Completely different thing than impeding his right to express what he did.

DM


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Ok everybody, take a deep breath and relax. This is an internet forum, nothing more.
People can choose to listen to whomever they wish here.
People can disagree without invalidating your opinion in the eyes of others.
People are free to ask why they should listen to you over the other guy...even when the other guy disagrees with you.
Feel free to attach whatever accomplishments you wish as evidence to your credibility...if you have none, expect to be questioned more thoroughly...or ignored. Everyone has a right to speak here, that doesn't mean people will believe you.
If your afraid of being called out for your opinion on an internet forum, you're not going to feel very comfortable posting anywhere.
If "Joe Pro" can't handle an Intermediate shooter disagreeing with him, I suggest doing like the majority and posting on Facebook where you can decide who can and can not question you.

I did not create this forum (though I assisted with my input, as did several others here). It has been my understanding from the start that this was going to be a different kind of forum. One that puts more emphasis on self moderation, with a distinct lack of advertisements, and a focus on Competition archery, with less discussion of gear, and NO bashing of members or companies.

IF the majority want changes to be made to how we run this, I'm open to that discussion. I am pretty opposed to requiring a credential to post here as I know quite a few "Advanced" shooters that don't have them. Again, that was tried. Every possible protection was offered to the Elite shooters, End result? NO ONE wanted to be there. I don't want this forum to follow suit.

I love the idea of posting whatever credential you feel is relevant to your sig or your "description" (i.e. many are listed as "registered user" instead of "Level 4 coach, or XXXX State champion etc).

If you have no credential, put in your sig your experience level. 
Of course this is all voluntary...but worth being part of the original question of:

'what can we, as the I/A archers this forum was originally designed for, do to reorient it so that it closely mirrors its original purpose?'

Lets focus on THAT for a while.


----------



## RCR_III (Mar 19, 2011)

The self moderation idea is I think a big part of the downfall and bickering and problems with this sub forum. Like the idea of a child that has, "too many parents." 

Unless we all have, "the buttons" then we aren't moderators. And that means a proper moderation, by the proper individual(s) is imperative. 

Otherwise you end up right where we are. 

Too many people, all with varying opinions, and all of which feel the need to self moderate or know the fact that they can moderate how they see fit without the proper repercussions.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

RCR_III said:


> The self moderation idea is I think a big part of the downfall and bickering and problems with this sub forum. Like the idea of a child that has, "too many parents."
> 
> Unless we all have, "the buttons" then we aren't moderators. And that means a proper moderation, by the proper individual(s) is imperative.
> 
> ...


Agreed. Someone needs to take the hammer and swing it with a purpose. 

Pin it down.


----------



## Shogun1 (Jan 31, 2015)

QUOTE=montigre;1085832433]No baiting going on here, just asking the I/A shooters who frequent this forum for honest and objective opinions on how they feel the I/A forum should proceed. Are the 3 questions you raised addressed to the intended group?[/QUOTE]

Baiting -- enticing others to engage in the debate. In this case asking for open and honest opinions on the subject of the post rather than visceral attacks on the OP or others who also choose to offer open and honest opinions on the subject of the post.

Subject of the OP: the subject material of the posts in this forum don't seem to be aligned with the original intent of the forum.

Assertion within the post: the intent of the forum is enable qualified seriously competitive archers to help each other overcome issues and increase their performance.

Implication of the OP: the contents of the intended posts may be inappropriate for the not seriously competitive archer who might be inclined to take the information out of context or misapply the information.

Bottom line question of the OP: what can the rank and file of the qualified seriously competitive archers do to ensure the content of the post is appropriate and/or those who post are qualified seriously competitive archers.

The three questions asked actually posed options for controlling the forum. How should the seriously qualified archers that frequent the forum respond when confronted with inappropriate posts? This is the only option available to them -- they have to make a decision about how they chooser to respond.

Requiring posters to establish their credentials in order to be allowed to post in the forum could work, but doing so is beyond the capability of the rank and file seriously qualified archers that frequent the forum. Instead would that not be the design of the website or the work of moderators?

With regard to the last question you ask -- and it a valid question -- yes, it is intended for all who frequent the forum.

But I would also submit that this entire thread -- which poses a valid issue -- does not meet the purported purposes of this forum. Nowhere in it can I find anything that would help an archer improve his ability to compete.

The problem is -- where would the issue be explored and options developed, if not here?


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Shogun1 said:


> But I would also submit that this entire thread -- which poses a valid issue -- does not meet the purported purposes of this forum. Nowhere in it can I find anything that would help an archer improve his ability to compete.


Developing the forum into being a useful tool to as many as possible means archers can use that tool to improve their ability to compete.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

cbrunson said:


> Agreed. Someone needs to take the hammer and swing it with a purpose.
> 
> Pin it down.



Will I be getting resume's for everyone here before posting? Or will we have a shoot off to decide who is the most knowledgeable?

If neither of those, what criteria do I use to decide if someone can reply or challenge and opinion?

The first line being rhetorical, the 2nd being serious.


----------



## RCR_III (Mar 19, 2011)

Well, when someone is attacking another or being rude beyond a reasonable expectation, I'd say start there. In this thread itself there has even been issues that, as always, get overlooked. Bickering gets taken too far on a regular basis around here. And that can be imagined to happen when you have a group of prideful, competent, and competitive individuals all together. But it needs to be reigned in. There needs to be a moderator that can handle that position. 

The quoted post from Cbrunson being referenced is a reply to my post about moderation. My post is not meant to say moderate those who are eligible to answer or not based on some qualification system. My post is directed to say, moderate based of forum rules and do the job a moderator is set forth to do. 

There are far too many examples of what I will reference of a personal situation, but I will only give my personal candor.

I have personally been attacked to a point where I had to pm the moderator of this sub forum to have my post moved because there was insufficient moderation being done in my thread. Attacking to a point I felt it became a game. To a point that after I had it moved to general discussion I was being pm'd with questions asking what people's problems were. 

And it cannot be said that the moderator was not notified or involved in the situation, but as has been seen here several times, the situation got out of hand because of a lack of respect to the moderator of this forum. Respect that's not given because it has had no direction to place it in. No guidelines. 

That's what I mean by moderating this forum efficiently and effectively. Without this, proven non-workable, self moderating strategy. That's run its course and needs to be fixed. One way or another. Because eventually the moderation needs of this sub forum will become an issue on the radar of administrators. And when that happens, things may happen quickly. And I for one don't want to see a target sub forum gone. I want to see it better.


----------



## Tiroarco (Nov 6, 2012)

I think the intent of this forum was good (at first). 

I followed it closely for a couple months. Shortly thereafter I realized it would soon shrivel up and wither away (I mentioned this in a past post). I check in from time to time only to find posts like this.

Here are my thoughts as to why this forum won't survive::

1. The perceived superiority (of some people). Its not a welcoming forum. Some are flogged for not asking "advanced" enough questions....well, its subjective.
2. The fact that a subject is never allowed to bloom into its full potential. Yes some of the questions may be basic but sometimes (when allowed) a seemingly simple question may develop into something productive due to the insight of all the forum members
3. Its stale!!!!! Most people are scared of posting anything for fear of retribution! 
4. When one grows the cahone's to ask a question its always answered by the same half dozen people. All due respect to those that take the time to answer. What works for one may not work for another and as such we need more input (from all members) 

I decided that my "advanced" questions are better addressed by my peers that watch me shoot at the club. After all.....if we are "advanced archers" the form issues we are likely to encounter are so small that it would require a live person viewing what you are doing.

I often ask myself how advanced some archers can be if they spend so much time on a keyboard? I suspect you won't see the likes of Reo, Levi, Segio etc. on these forums because they are improving their form at the range. 

Finally.....if you don't allow for some variety in this forum it will turn into a forum of 10-12 active posters (trending that way). There is more knowledge in a group of 100 mediocre archers than a clan of 12.

Just my 2 cents. 

I suspect there will be retribution for what I posted above, so I likely won't check in for a few more days ;-)


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

Mahly said:


> Will I be getting resume's for everyone here before posting? Or will we have a shoot off to decide who is the most knowledgeable?
> 
> If neither of those, what criteria do I use to decide if someone can reply or challenge and opinion?
> 
> The first line being rhetorical, the 2nd being serious.


I guess you just have to decide what things you want to be posted here, and by who. If it is left up to who makes the most noise, you can bet for sure people that really care about quality topics will go away. Jacob is a prime example with his own admission in this thread. Ask him why he doesn't post anymore. 

I personally have no qualms with an argument between passionate guys that are in it for the same purpose. I believe it inspires good dialogue, but to continually get drug down in the mud with some guy that doesn't have any real dog in the fight other than some strange online bromance is just a waste of words.

So tell me, do you want to discuss things like tournament nerves with people that shoot tournaments, or people that read books and shoot in their back yard? Do you know the difference? How do you control it? Well, it isn't hard for me to find out who shoots and who doesn't. In the last year many of us have found ways to communicate with each other away from here even though this is the place we discovered each other. We all seem to agree on this. That is why these threads keep popping up. It's not about being elitist, it's about having the same interests and wanting to share them with like minded individuals.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Without going into detail about any particular incident I will say the following 

There is a HUGE potential to misinterpret what someone posts in a text only format. What one may FEEL is an attack on their person may only be a tactless disagreement.
Yes, this IS a group of people who for the most part have been doing this a LONG time, or at least long enough to get pretty good at it. When most of us here are told we are wrong, we will meet that with resistance.

In a way I wish I could show all the "infractions" I have had to give. Several members being banned...sometimes more than once. For the most part I do not wish to give anyone an infraction, or edit their posts. That said, when there is something that crosses the line, it is dealt with. Even in this thread, things started a little rocky in the first couple posts, but people were adults and worked it out.

I will not keep people from disagreeing with anyone here. If ANYONE feels they have been personally attacked (i.e. "So&so is a liar and sux at archery" is an attack. "So&so is wrong about "_" and here's why" is not). report the post. I am not the only one who sees the reported post. If I am not online, and it is truly over the line, it will be dealt with. If it's questionable, they might leave it for me to deal with. but in any case, plenty of mods/admin will get to see your report.

When action is taken, usually there post, and any posts referring to it or quoting it are deleted (so don't reply to the post...as it will only be deleted as well).

I have heard that The Moderation here has not been stick enough..... How many agree/disagree? I can/will make adjustments, I have in the past, but it usually ends up with a couple people getting more infractions/bans.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> It's not about being elitist, it's about having the same interests and wanting to share them with like minded individuals.


I don't see why you all can't do this right now in this forum as-is? There's no restriction that I know of on your posting? You all already know who each of you are, so what's the problem (_besides_ being beset by old guys who just read books. We get that already. And it's a non-argument for reasons I've already stated)?

DM


----------



## oldpro888 (Dec 31, 2010)

This is really sad for AT. An accomplished shooter, asked for some advice from peers about a change in equipment in his scope. Some Elitists on this forum find helping aging old pro beneath their skill level. 
It was just a question I asked from peers. Not worthy of a thread going on for several pages. Come on folks, get over your selves. And let's see if honest feed back reaps the wrath from AT. It will be my last post anyway


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Archery Talk was created around the premise of "Archers Helping Archers"... there was a time when that was what it was.


----------



## pbuck (Mar 30, 2010)

mgnasi said:


> I think the intent of this forum was good (at first).
> 
> I followed it closely for a couple months. Shortly thereafter I realized it would soon shrivel up and wither away (I mentioned this in a past post). I check in from time to time only to find posts like this.
> 
> ...


Nailed it!


----------



## equilibrium (Oct 31, 2006)

You all are just pissed. I nailed it in my post. Take a step back......................................and buy a ILF bow.


----------



## equilibrium (Oct 31, 2006)

If it's a penny for your thoughts but, everyone want to put in their two cents................................someone is making a penny.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

mgnasi said:


> I think the intent of this forum was good (at first).
> 
> I followed it closely for a couple months. Shortly thereafter I realized it would soon shrivel up and wither away (I mentioned this in a past post). I check in from time to time only to find posts like this.
> 
> ...


Good reply.....Really didn't even want to reply to the Thread...

Other than what "color of vane," answer a simple question and let it go. 

Retired, key board and archery range 35 feet apart. I am not a Advanced Archer. I'm more of a Lingering Archer. Hey, I know my limitations and know how old I am and I've probably done shot my best. There's no Gold Ring to grab. Doesn't keep me from learning though and wanting to shoot my best. Today, looked over I/A, shot some at home, looked over I/A, went to town (9 miles) and shot at a new Indoor range, came home, checked I/A, went out and shot some more and here I am.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

oldpro888 said:


> This is really sad for AT. An accomplished shooter, asked for some advice from peers about a change in equipment in his scope. Some Elitists on this forum find helping aging old pro beneath their skill level.
> It was just a question I asked from peers. Not worthy of a thread going on for several pages. Come on folks, get over your selves. And let's see if honest feed back reaps the wrath from AT. It will be my last post anyway
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I don't see this as about any one post. I think that particular issue is over.

It's about how we want this forum to be as a collective.

Some say we should qualify archers before they post, others say to let anything go, some don't want to allow too much debate, some are somewhere in between.

Obviously, I won't make everyone happy. Best I can do is make it tolerable and as useful for as many as possible while keeping true to the intent of the forum.


----------



## N7709K (Dec 17, 2008)

Mahly said:


> Is it a little elitist? Some may say so, I say thats just how you make sub-forums. Are the bare bow guys elitist because they don't want to discuss lens diopters? Is the coaches corner elitist for not wanting to discuss what tree stand is best? Why are we elitist for not wanting to discuss those topics as well?


I was always labeled elitist because I shot pro and kept certain information off of the table due to the discussion level... it happens, those who have met me at shoots know that isn't the case and I don't need to prove it on a forum. As far as this forum being "elitist" i would say that it is no where near; it may have a limited number of members whom supply information but it is not elitist.




cbrunson said:


> So tell me, do you want to discuss things like tournament nerves with people that shoot tournaments, or people that read books and shoot in their back yard? Do you know the difference? How do you control it? Well, it isn't hard for me to find out who shoots and who doesn't. In the last year many of us have found ways to communicate with each other away from here even though this is the place we discovered each other. We all seem to agree on this. That is why these threads keep popping up. It's not about being elitist, it's about having the same interests and wanting to share them with like minded individuals.


Communication outside the forum is possibly the best outlet for the information that is being sought after because it is much easier to involve other highlevel or knowledgeable persons in the discussion. I have a few shooters whom still contact me for information and questions about shooting; its much easier to have then give me a call and talk through the issue and the tangents feeding the issue over the phone that try and type out a response that hits upon all the causes... and when it comes to a topic that I don't feel confidently about answering I can make a simple text or call and get the answer I need to pass along.




Mahly said:


> Will I be getting resume's for everyone here before posting? Or will we have a shoot off to decide who is the most knowledgeable?
> 
> If neither of those, what criteria do I use to decide if someone can reply or challenge and opinion?
> 
> The first line being rhetorical, the 2nd being serious.


the archery community in a whole is very small; go to national shoot like vegas and you'll meet half or more of the people posting here... its not hard to tell in person who knows their stuff and who is just passing along second hand information; especially if you watch the interactions between the shooter in question and their peers or the manu's. 

there are a couple here whom i met a couple years ago in vegas... one I met while they were talking to Kevin Wilkey about an issue they had with lower cam lean on a pro comp; kevin and I both offered up parts and help to get the issue fixed. When you make large shoots and meet people you name gets around and so does a reputation as to whether or not you know your stuff.... just sayin


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

And I think that is a big key here.
It seems as though some don't believe that people can figure out if you know what your talking about vs. someone else who disagrees with you.
I think most here can figure out who they should take advice from, and who they shouldn't.
Equal voice doesn't mean equal weight.
I'm betting most of the more "colorful debates" could be avoided if those who TRUELY know their stuff would trust that people will be able to tell and listen.


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

Mahly said:


> And I think that is a big key here.
> It seems as though some don't believe that people can figure out if you know what your talking about vs. someone else who disagrees with you.
> I think most here can figure out who they should take advice from, and who they shouldn't.
> Equal voice doesn't mean equal weight.
> I'm betting most of the more "colorful debates" could be avoided if those who TRUELY know their stuff would trust that people will be able to tell and listen.


I agree fully with this statement and have myself fallen into the catagory of not trusting the fact that most know or can easily figure out who is speaking from personal experience and who is rehashing 2nd hand information. 

I must add that some of the more colorful debates could also be avoided if those members who disagree with a poster in a manner that is rude, dismissive, passively flaming, or otherwise disrespectful were to have their post promptly removed from the discussion and if their actions continue, hand down infractions/warnings or whatever they are. So some measure stricter moderation is probably in order, at least for the short term.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

montigre said:


> I must add that some of the more colorful debates could also be avoided if those members who disagree with a poster in a manner that is rude, dismissive, passively flaming, or otherwise disrespectful were to have their post promptly removed from the discussion and if their actions continue, hand down infractions/warnings or whatever they are. So some measure stricter moderation is probably in order, at least for the short term.


I disagree again. It's not Mahly's or AT's job to shield you from posts or persons you simply don't like, disagree with or find offensive. That's your responsibility, not anyone else's. Otherwise, Mahly is forced to endlessly keep track of who is always offended and ruffled by who and what, and that's not his job. Your reactions to what you read are your job to take care of, not his.

So I think this impulse to not be offended and be shielded from one's own insecurities is trying to force a fix to the forum that simply isn't needed. I'll reiterate my position that I think Mahly is moderating the forum very well already, he intervenes and shuts things down only when they truly get out of hand and otherwise everyone is actually quite free to post as they see fit. In my view, it just ain't broke so it don't need fixin' 

I still see no reason why the "elites" can't simply post and communicate online with each other on the forum right now as it is. You all know who each of you is already and you know who the undesirables are too. Just use your scroll buttons to avoid the content you don't want to read, and pluck out the info you are interested in.

Finally, I think Jacob is right and I've stated this in the past: if you really need elite-level input on your shooting, this isn't the place to look for it. If you really truly need Olympic-level training, you really should be going somewhere else, your coaches, say, for that than here. 

DM


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

The problem is with the statement that users dictate the direction of the forum, or it being moderated by the users. Every time I’ve seen members post on a topic stating that the topic should be posted elsewhere, the “elitist” accusations fly, and people’s feelings are hurt. Quite often I’ve seen it being something along the lines of, “I’m admittedly a beginner, but I wanted to post it here to get opinions from the more advanced shooters.” That’s fine if that is what everyone wants, but it doesn’t seem to be.

You can’t let users moderate. Especially with such a broad, or no clear definition of what Intermediate or advanced is. If I shoot mid 290s on a NFAA indoor target at local leagues, my understanding of a large number of things is going to be completely different than someone that averages mid 290s on a Vegas face. There again that individual will see things differently than a shooter that averages 299-300 Vegas games. The only issues being the determination of what does or doesn’t belong. Too many opinions.

Some have expectations too high, and others too low. Define it, or it will continue to be confusing for everyone. Whatever that definition is, just define it and moderate accordingly.


----------



## GRIMWALD (Sep 28, 2012)

This Sub-forum, I am reminded of petulant children squabbling over something trivial. The only way to solve the bickering is to remove the item form them entirety.
Lock the Sub-forum for a week or two, let all benefit from the privilege or let all suffer from it's lack. 
After a couple of weeks, reinstate the privileges and if the intolerance continues, lock it permanently.

Those wishing for outside "stricter" moderation, be careful what you wish for. You may be the one who is intern moderated. 


GRIM


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

I absolutely love it when I get out of my truck and go into the building or onto the practice bags and I can walk right over and set up next to Levi Morgan or Jesse Broadwater or Chance or Brayden or any of the other awesome pro shooters, I load a arrow and shoot right next to them and watch what they do and if the time is right I will ask a question about their setup or what they are doing. 

I just love it when I get to do that here also, when I can present my thoughts right next to a top pro shooter and get feedback from them it is so cool. I operate on 100% confidence in my thoughts and methods until I have someone present things to me in a way that allows me to see the need to make a change or add to my knowledge.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

montigre said:


> I must add that some of the more colorful debates could also be avoided if those members who disagree with a poster* in a manner that is rude, dismissive, passively flaming, or otherwise disrespectful *were to have their post promptly removed from the discussion and if their actions continue, hand down infractions/warnings or whatever they are. So some measure stricter moderation is probably in order, at least for the short term.





dmacey said:


> I disagree again. DM


What is there to disagree with? Even Mahly has stepped in to "cool" a heated discussion, done so here already...."Ok everybody, take a deep breath and relax."

That little black triangle can used. Give links to. Perhaps the black triangle goes to another moderator, suggest that be sent to Mahly. He's here to see all, maybe late, but better than never....


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

SonnyThomas said:


> What is there to disagree with? Even Mahly has stepped in to "cool" a heated discussion, done so here already...."Ok everybody, take a deep breath and relax."
> 
> That little black triangle can used. Give links to. Perhaps the black triangle goes to another moderator, suggest that be sent to Mahly. He's here to see all, maybe late, but better than never....


I'm not referring here to obvious behavior like actual Ad Hominum attacks and what is clearly foul language and name calling, etc. Only this immature notion of wanting protection from content that's "beneath" someone, or questions or simple criticism. That appears to be what's wanted by the "elites" in this case and that's just not tenable in a free forum. And as I said, dealing with content that you simply don't like or handling questioning and criticism is the job of the individual, not Mahly or AT. They should not be asked to have to keep certain posters guarded from every little thing that bothers them by endlessly rewriting the site, creating new forums, rewriting the rules over and over and so on. That's just ridiculous. Dealing with being offended is the individual's job, not Mahly's. He's got enough on his plate already.

Yes, very obvious name-calling or personal attacks I fully agree fall within the domain of the forum moderator. And as I said I think Mahly already does an excellent job dealing with that. But simply having your feathers ruffled because you were responded to by a 'noob' or somebody starts a thread on a topic that's beneath you... That's just part of being a grown-up. We all have to deal with that in our lives on our own and that's just life....

DM


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

life`s to short for these small disagreements, and as sonny and other`s have said take a deep breath ,it just hurts archery when people post nasty statements.i shoot a couple of bow leagues and I am never been the best don`t care either have got to shoot with a a couple pro`s over the years and that was fun too.the only time I have got a first and that was when I was first to get a cold beer out of the case during beer league ! and this Wednesday its beer league & pizza again ! if you are worried about your scores you probably are not having fun anymore.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

Pete53 said:


> if you are worried about your scores you probably are not having fun anymore.


I think that may be where a majority of the confusion comes from. Some people really enjoy competition. That *IS* the fun for them. That *IS* what this forum was supposed to be when it was created.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

I agree with cbrunson. We don't want to go the other extreme and discourage conversation about scores and competition. It goes off in the weeds if constraints are imposed on your posting based on _what_ scores you shoot, in my view as I've already stated, but I agree that posters should feel free to discuss scores and inquire about scores, etc. Again I draw the line at such-and-such a response is _required_ to participate in this forum - you need to be prepared not to get an answer or an answer that doesn't satisfy you. Unless and until AT itself decides on and imposes a requirement, you have to tolerate that.

But I do believe the "elites" should be totally free to discuss this amongst themselves with no impediments (and I believe they already enjoy that freedom).

DM


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

So much to reply to, would take a full page to do the whole quote reply thing for each, so here's an abbreviated version.

Yes, there can be posts with perfectly acceptable language that qualify as trolling. Drawing the line is the tough part, and I will normally PM the person in question to let them know they are into that grey zone. Many posting here have received such a PM. There is a difference between shielding someones feelings, and maintaining a polite debate. I can see that on average, people would like to see a little more politeness, and would like that grey area adjusted. I acknowledge that and will moderate accordingly. Again, I am going by what seems to be the average opinion. It won't be ruled with an iron fist, and it won't prevent moderation to cleverly worded rude posts or attacks.

Sometimes people just can't seem to stand the idea that someone might just believe them when they disagree with you (you being a generic term for whoever is posting). If you are confident in your opinion, do NOT tell us that "so&so" is wrong, tell us why your right. If your right, it should be pretty easy.

This forum is about competition, scores are how you measure competition. And yes, competition IS fun (or it should be....if you aren't having fun competing, you should probably quit competing...but if you can still help others that compete, your welcome here).


Going forward, yes, there will be debates. Yes, some may get heated. When things start getting personal (even if it's somewhat tactful) that's where I will be making a change. The same thread doesn't need the same posters repeating the same lines over and over. Your posts are able to be seen by everyone. People are aware of how to use a scroll wheel and/or key..no need to harp on the same thing repeatedly in a thread. Try to be polite (would you talk that way to someone at the diner table with grandma?). That doesn't mean you can't defend yourself or your ideas...just don't drag the topic into the proverbial mud.

The little black triangle thing is there for you to use. Just because you use it doesn't mean you will SEE a result. The poster in question might get a PM from me, or an infraction. I will NOT discuss any infractions given to other members, and the P In PM is for Private. Heck, I might not agree that anything should be done, or I will pass it on to an Admin to decide.
Reports are confidential, and I will not discuss who is using it with anyone outside of the Admins.
I often can't read each and every post made here as it's being posted (I have a real job, and love sleeping :wink: ), so use the report feature. It doesn't mean the poster in question will get a ban or even an infraction. It just means we (Mods and Admin) will have our attention called to a particular post....that's all.

Thank you ALL for your input! Again, being a unique forum, there is no guidebook for me to use. YOU help make the rules. They are now a little more clear for me.
If anyone wishes to discuss the logic and process of how I deal with reported posts, I am open to that if needed.


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

Thank you, Mahly; I feel this is what may be needed at this time. And thanks to everyone who posted their opinions on this thread--it is only through positive cooperation that we can hope to grow this forum in a positive light.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

Very interesting read. I encourage everyone here to read it. Then ask yourself why this place is different.

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2432624


----------



## TNMAN (Oct 6, 2009)

cbrunson said:


> Very interesting read. I encourage everyone here to read it. Then ask yourself why this place is different.
> 
> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2432624


I read the Fita forum fairly often but never comment because it's outside of my experience. But, it's obvious why the conversation there is different. Those folks, for the most part, know each other and each other's experience, shooting level, kids names, and wife's name....past and present.

And I agree that Bo Jackson is quite a bit beyond "elite".

What's your point? :wink:


----------



## N7709K (Dec 17, 2008)

Personally I view the "trusting they know their stuff" to be a grey area in some respects; especially as the topics become more advanced or the specifics become more finite. There are different ways to go about the same issue and different ways of addressing the issue will bring about different paths that all hold their own sets of challenges. It has gotten easier as certain members have moved away from the anonymity of the keyboard and that is possibly the biggest factor in progressing the flow of information. 


For myself; I'm not hard to track down, and I have no issue fielding texts or phone calls or what have you on questions ... And that's what works better for my schedule and my level of involvement in the sport.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

cbrunson said:


> Very interesting read. I encourage everyone here to read it. Then ask yourself why this place is different.
> 
> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2432624


That is indeed an interesting read.

In addition to the reasons noted above I believe there is another important distinction that makes this place "different." 

I am convinced that the contributors of that forum are one step ahead of the average contributor of this or other forums where the participants tend to be more compound oriented. How I mean that is this; they understand that archery is a philosophy as much as it is a skill. I don't believe that line of thinking has been accepted in the average joe compound shooter yet. 

That could be evidenced by some of the more thought provoking and philosophical topics that have been posted here which require thinking outside of the box. Many of those topics fall flat on their face. But post up a topic that challenges some of the popular held beliefs in archery (the accepted norm as promoted by "experts") and this place burns to the ground.

I am convinced the normal participants of that forum are more advanced than that.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> Very interesting read. I encourage everyone here to read it. Then ask yourself why this place is different.
> 
> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2432624


There's no attempt being made to restrict access to their forum is the difference. This appears just to be a discussion about the definition of terms of rank and that's about it. 
Also in olympic style recurve, tho I've been shooting it a long time, I'd definitely a "beginner" on that bow.

DM


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

TNMAN said:


> I read the Fita forum fairly often but never comment because it's outside of my experience. But, it's obvious why the conversation there is different. Those folks, for the most part, know each other and each other's experience, shooting level, kids names, and wife's name....past and present.
> 
> And I agree that Bo Jackson is quite a bit beyond "elite".
> 
> What's your point? :wink:


The point is they are not only okay with establishing levels of competence, they accept their places within those criteria. They know each other because they are serious about their sport


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

dmacey said:


> There's no attempt being made to restrict access to their forum is the difference. This appears just to be a discussion about the definition of terms of rank and that's about it.
> Also in olympic style recurve, tho I've been shooting it a long time, I'd definitely a "beginner" on that bow.
> 
> DM


I do not remember one single post on this forum suggesting any person is not welcome. That is something that has been made up by people like yourself that feel unwelcome when your statements are challenged. Look in the mirror before you point fingers.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

Lazarus said:


> That could be evidenced by some of the more thought provoking and philosophical topics that have been posted here which require thinking outside of the box. Many of those topics fall flat on their face. But post up a topic that challenges some of the popular held beliefs in archery (the accepted norm as promoted by "experts") and this place burns to the ground.


You've obviously never shot olympic style recurve or tried to challenge your coach on the more doctrinaire topics of shooting one, have you? Of course you haven't . Back in college, I tried that on Frank Thomas on something when I was taking one of his classes and I still have the scars leftover from that encounter.

Do some more searching in that forum; you'll find some awesome knock-down dragouts on everything from clicker control to the demise of the recurve if the compound gets accepted in the Olympics, and all the other 8000 dimensions of the universe. They're in there and they're really somethin' to read on a Friday night.

OTOH, I do think you make an excellent point, here. You're quite right, I think, that the olympic recurve is somewhat of a different school of thought. It's older than the compound and has a longer pedagogical history - it's more of a form-oriented style and so it does have its own culture. In a way, that too can put an end to the fighting in some cases - you can go to the "sacred" body of knowledge under discussion (say the KSL shot cycle) and end the argument: see? it's written right here.... 

DM


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> I do not remember one single post on this forum suggesting any person is not welcome. That is something that has been made up by people like yourself that feel unwelcome when your statements are challenged. Look in the mirror before you point fingers.


This post right here would be the perfect example of just such a thing. It doesn't bother me <edited>. But other posters aren't like me and would definitely interpret a post like this directed at them as <edited> devoid of any content that may help them with their shooting. And this isn't the first such thing I've seen from you. So, thanks for providing a good example.

DM


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

dmacey said:


> Also in olympic style recurve, tho I've been shooting it a long time, I'd definitely a "beginner" on that bow.
> 
> DM


And how would you honestly class yourself on the compound?


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

cbrunson said:


> I do not remember one single post on this forum suggesting any person is not welcome. That is something that has been made up by people like yourself that feel unwelcome when your statements are challenged. Look in the mirror before you point fingers.


Telling one that their post is better suited for another forum or a Post/Thread moved out of this forum without explanation goes toward not welcome. And there have been comments made in General Archery Discussion of being moved out of I/A or words to that effect.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

grantmac said:


> And how would you honestly class yourself on the compound?


I've already answered that question a long time ago.

DM


----------



## Reverend (Nov 2, 2004)

Democrats want more government regulation.
Republicans want more self-regulation.
Which will it be AT?


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

dmacey said:


> I've already answered that question a long time ago.
> 
> DM


Do you feel that you are entitled to posting in here based on your shooting ability? Or is it a fundamental right provided you comply with the rules of AT?


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

At one time there was a pro forum that only pro's could post or read. Maybe this forum could be made this way. The elite could decide what would be needed to read or post in this forum. 

Check into it. You may get exactly what you are wanting.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

grantmac said:


> Do you feel that you are entitled to posting in here based on your shooting ability?


No. I'm entitled to post here because I'm an AT member and otherwise meet AT requirements for posting in its forums. There is no "shooting ability" requirement to post here.


> Or is it a fundamental right provided you comply with the rules of AT?


See above.

DM


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

SonnyThomas said:


> Telling one that their post is better suited for another forum or a Post/Thread moved out of this forum without explanation goes toward not welcome. And there have been comments made in General Archery Discussion of being moved out of I/A or words to that effect.


Being told a topic doesn't belong is different than saying a person doesn't belong. Though I agree it can be taken that way by some people. You know you are guilty of it yourself. It's about the topic right? 

That will happen if you control content. The issue has only been with regular posters pointing it out instead of just waiting for the moderator to do it. But remember that is what was asked if us in the beginning.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

jim p said:


> At one time there was a pro forum that only pro's could post or read. Maybe this forum could be made this way. The elite could decide what would be needed to read or post in this forum.
> 
> Check into it. You may get exactly what you are wanting.


Already been done. Although I think the term "elite", is a bit ambiguous. 

I believe this thread was intended to elicit a response from one individual. That has been accomplished. The rest from that point has been purely for entertainment purposes.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

jim p said:


> At one time there was a pro forum that only pro's could post or read. Maybe this forum could be made this way. The elite could decide what would be needed to read or post in this forum.
> 
> Check into it. You may get exactly what you are wanting.


We had that recently...only pros could offer advice, but other could read. There was 1 thread of people introducing themselves... Maybe 4-5 guys. That was the only traffic for over a year and a half.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

cbrunson said:


> Being told a topic doesn't belong is different than saying a person doesn't belong. Though I agree it can be taken that way by some people. You know you are guilty of it yourself. It's about the topic right?
> 
> That will happen if you control content. The issue has only been with regular posters pointing it out instead of just waiting for the moderator to do it. But remember that is what was asked if us in the beginning.


I answered in PM for many. What you do?


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

SonnyThomas said:


> I answered in PM for many. What you do?


I usually don't chime in on those threads. Only these ones, where the concept is in question. I think a lot of topics have merit if dug into a little deeper. From my perspective, people generally want to make a big issue of things, warranted or not. Nature of the beast. People love drama. Even ******* dudes that swear they don't. I guarantee there are hundreds of them reading this thread that are saying, "Nope, not me! Can't stand it." Yet here they are, reading all the new posts every time it turns bold again.....and now they're smiling at the personal revelation.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

grantmac said:


> ...Or is it a fundamental right provided you comply with the rules of AT?


PS: by way of clarification, this is another item where I think you're confused. AT is, if I'm not mistaken, privately owned and maintained, so referring to permission to post on AT as a "fundamental right" is ultimately inapplicable. I, you and everyone else only retains that privilege at the pleasure of AT; they can withdraw that privilege at their pleasure also. Mahly may be able to clarify that, but as a private entity it can make its own rules about "fundamental rights" to post. Of course correct me if I'm wrong on that point?

By the same token, if the "elites" are thinking that way about their "right" to restrict posting based on what they think should be the entrance requirements for individual posters, they're probably confused on this point as well.

DM


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

It has been my experience that those who feel a need to be argumentative with others and clammor for the last say in a debate, are those with the least amount of valuable information to share.

PS.........................SIGH!!


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

montigre said:


> It has been my experience that those who feel a need to be argumentative with others and clammor for the last say in a debate, are those with the least amount of valuable information to share.
> 
> PS.........................SIGH!!


Nobody is being "argumentative" or "clammor for the last say". You're reading things that aren't there (I was just clarifying a point I didn't make in my original post to grantmac, that's all).

DM


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

montigre said:


> It has been my experience that those who feel a need to be argumentative with others and clammor for the last say in a debate, are those with the least amount of valuable information to share.
> 
> PS.........................SIGH!!


Lol. I belong damn it !!!! Why won't you listen to me??? :lol:


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> Lol. I belong damn it !!!! Why won't you listen to me??? :lol:


I think you guys were doing better a bit ago when you _weren't_ reading my posts, what happened?  Uh oh, I think I'm "clammoring" now! 

DM


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

t::angry::fuming::nono::focus:


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

This does not surprise me. When you limit who can participate, you may just end up with a dead page/forum.



Mahly said:


> We had that recently...only pros could offer advice, but other could read. There was 1 thread of people introducing themselves... Maybe 4-5 guys. That was the only traffic for over a year and a half.


----------



## equilibrium (Oct 31, 2006)

Another thing is. People that shoot ILF bows under the NFAA definition of Traditional don't have a place like this to chat. I like to shoot 101 yards all the way down to 7 feet. Four arrows at 28 targets or two arrows at 42 targets. So, the question is how many of those archers chat here, because the rest of the archery business doesn't even look at you if you aren't shooting near perfect scores. Try shooting the Redding Safari and scoring 18's and tell me that isn't something. No sights, no draw check and shooting fingers. My point is, you guys at ;
least have an avenue to vent, even complain about what's posted on it. Now, if I over stepped in posting this here, just keep it to yourself. I already know what I am. It's perspective.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

equilibrium said:


> Another thing is. People that shoot ILF bows under the NFAA definition of Traditional don't have a place like this to chat. I like to shoot 101 yards all the way down to 7 feet. Four arrows at 28 targets or two arrows at 42 targets. So, the question is how many of those archers chat here, because the rest of the archery business doesn't even look at you if you aren't shooting near perfect scores. Try shooting the Redding Safari and scoring 18's and tell me that isn't something. No sights, no draw check and shooting fingers. My point is, you guys at ;
> least have an avenue to vent, even complain about what's posted on it. Now, if I over stepped in posting this here, just keep it to yourself. I already know what I am. It's perspective.


You have the FITA and Trad forums plus tradtalk. This really isn't the place.


----------



## equilibrium (Oct 31, 2006)

So, recurve shooters aren't welcome? Sorry, I butted in them. Good luck guys.


----------



## equilibrium (Oct 31, 2006)

Wait. You think, "You have the FITA and Trad forums plus tradtalk. This really isn't the place." Is even close to Redding or a field shoot. FITA is only 55 yards and most trad shooters only shoot 30 yards. WOW......


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Tradtalk has many world and national barebow champions posting on a regular basis. This forum is dedicated to compound target archery, do you think you will profit by involving yourself in it? Will anyone else? If so post away......


----------



## equilibrium (Oct 31, 2006)

grantmac said:


> Tradtalk has many world and national barebow champions posting on a regular basis. This forum is dedicated to compound target archery, do you think you will profit by involving yourself in it? Will anyone else? If so post away......


No, I don't. bye.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

I won't miss him....


----------



## RCR_III (Mar 19, 2011)

I use to get aggravated at some posts/replies, but now I really just sit and laugh. A lot. One, because it keeps me from going crazy at some of the banter here and two, because I have to think there's some that never post on AT anymore that still read through all this and shake their heads. 

If anyone listens to the Easton's Podcasts, Steve and George mentioned AT and the Vegas thread and I can't say their disposition behind it was positive haha PC 22 if you want to listen. It's a good one actually.


----------



## nestly (Apr 19, 2015)

Dang, we sure have some unfriendly people in here. 

IMO, this thread was started and supported by those who want to be regarded as "important" (whether or not they deserve it), and everyone with a strong opinion on either side pull out the fangs. The rest of us who compete on an "intermediate" and/or "advanced" level just want a place to talk about competitive archery (which is not the same as "general" archery). This forum serves a purpose and generally works fine except for a few who always complain about the content and try to belittle those who they disagree with for whatever reason(s). Those few self delegated "important" people have already created an exclusive forum/group for themselves, so if they're not happy with this subforum, I suggest they just post in that group and stay clear of this sub-forum that apparently offends them so much.



montigre said:


> and if anyone openly recommends that a thread be moved, then they are taken to the cleaners by those making those types of posts


There's a fairly simple solution to that. Just contact a moderator instead of posting in public. The public commenting on potentially mis-placed topics only invites controversy and bickering and it has no benefit to the forum since neither you, nor I, nor the OP, nor anyone else that's not a moderator can move it anyway. Thread is either moved, or not moved depending on moderator decision... no one gets "taken to the cleaners" Everyone wins!


----------



## thunderbolt (Oct 11, 2002)

nestly said:


> Dang, we sure have some unfriendly people in here.
> 
> IMO, this thread was started and supported by those who want to be regarded as "important" (whether or not they deserve it), and everyone with a strong opinion on either side pull out the fangs. The rest of us who compete on an "intermediate" and/or "advanced" level just want a place to talk about competitive archery (which is not the same as "general" archery). This forum serves a purpose and generally works fine except for a few who always complain about the content and try to belittle those who they disagree with for whatever reason(s). Those few self delegated "important" people have already created an exclusive forum/group for themselves, so if they're not happy with this subforum, I suggest they just post in that group and stay clear of this sub-forum that apparently offends them so much.
> 
> ...


After all this...finally a bit of common sense! You said exactly what many here are thinking...:wink:


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

nestly said:


> There's a fairly simple solution to that. Just contact a moderator instead of posting in public. The public commenting on potentially mis-placed topics only invites controversy and bickering and it has no benefit to the forum since neither you, nor I, nor the OP, nor anyone else that's not a moderator can move it anyway. Thread is either moved, or not moved depending on moderator decision... no one gets "taken to the cleaners" Everyone wins!


You weren't involved in the creation of this forum. The first specific instruction was for users to help moderate it. That is where this stems from. In fact, most of those speaking in opposition weren't here. I suppose that has a lot to do with the differences in views. I do agree now that it can not work that way and in my opinion, that notion of user defined subject matter should be abandoned. Too many people take it personal.


----------



## equilibrium (Oct 31, 2006)

I like this page. I've been reading it for awhile and will continue. I just picked the wrong time to give some levity, probably bad timing on my behalf. It was probably more of a reach out to see if there are any like me also reading the thread. I'm not upset about what the guy from BC said or that sonny won't miss me. I think, what AT is doing for archers here is a good thing, even if people step on a few toes. Over all it betters the sport..IMO. Anyway, have a great season and who knows...maybe we'll shoot next to each other.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

equilibrium said:


> I like this page. I've been reading it for awhile and will continue. I just picked the wrong time to give some levity, probably bad timing on my behalf. It was probably more of a reach out to see if there are any like me also reading the thread. I'm not upset about what the guy from BC said or that sonny won't miss me. I think, what AT is doing for archers here is a good thing, even if people step on a few toes. Over all it betters the sport..IMO. Anyway, have a great season and who knows...maybe we'll shoot next to each other.


It was your attitude, that's all. Don't miss anyone that has "attitude." I shot Traditional bows as a youth and still had my recurve target bows until a couple of years ago, old 66 and 72" Shakespeares. Don Owens is probably the finest Traditional shooter I know and loves Field, but then he's the only one using a Traditional bow, a recurve. Helped him get bales for his Field practicing. 
We had one big Traditional Shoot at a club and they, the Traditional people, killed it. Okay, it was a club hosting the Traditional Shoot. A club of 140 members. Traditional people wouldn't allow compound bows on the course and making it worse, they wouldn't allow compound club members shoot on the practice range. Hey, practicing on the Practice course had no effect on Traditional shooters, but they threw a fit. End of the Traditional Shoot...


----------



## nestly (Apr 19, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> You weren't involved in the creation of this forum. The first specific instruction was for users to help moderate it. That is where this stems from. In fact, most of those speaking in opposition weren't here. I suppose that has a lot to do with the differences in views. I do agree now that it can not work that way and in my opinion, that notion of user defined subject matter should be abandoned. Too many people take it personal.


Whether your characterization of what was "intended" is accurate or not, we've clearly moved to a different place now. Chastising someone for posting in the "wrong forum" isn't usually well received and there's ample evidence that it should either end or be done more tactfully than how it's currently being done. Someone gets offended every time it happens, if not the OP, then the person suggesting the topic should be moved when they're "taken to the cleaners". (see the first post in this topic for an example of the latter) Again, since only the Moderator can move it, why not just eliminate all the public fighting about whether a topic should or shouldn't be moved and leave it up to the person(s) who are actually able to move it?



cbrunson said:


> You weren't involved in the creation of this forum.


Grrrr.... Why even make that statement except to try to exert a sense of superiority (commonly referred to as "elitism" here)? Whether I was or wasn't here as long as someone else means nothing in the present. That was then, and this is now, so regardless of what you believe this forum was "intended" to be, we are dealing with the current conditions and what's best for this I/A now. I'm truly sorry this forum isn't what some think it should be, but IMO this forum should serve the greater interests of the majority of competitive archers, not just a minority group of competitive archers that may or may not have higher "credentials"


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

equilibrium said:


> I like this page. I've been reading it for awhile and will continue. I just picked the wrong time to give some levity, probably bad timing on my behalf. It was probably more of a reach out to see if there are any like me also reading the thread. I'm not upset about what the guy from BC said or that sonny won't miss me. I think, what AT is doing for archers here is a good thing, even if people step on a few toes. Over all it betters the sport..IMO. Anyway, have a great season and who knows...maybe we'll shoot next to each other.


Unless something has changed I still hold the one-day record for indoor Trad on the Blueface in Washington and most of my archery time is spent on competitive barebow. I don't bring that in here though because it's not the place and I wouldn't be contributing in a useful manner. There are much better forums for that (tradtalk).

Grant


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

nestly said:


> Whether your characterization of what was "intended" is accurate or not, we've clearly moved to a different place now. Chastising someone for posting in the "wrong forum" isn't usually well received and there's ample evidence that it should either end or be done more tactfully than how it's currently being done. Someone gets offended every time it happens, if not the OP, then the person suggesting the topic should be moved when they're "taken to the cleaners". (see the first post in this topic for an example of the latter) Again, since only the Moderator can move it, why not just eliminate all the public fighting about whether a topic should or shouldn't be moved and leave it up to the person(s) who are actually able to move it?
> 
> 
> 
> Grrrr.... *Why even make that statement* except to try to exert a sense of superiority (commonly referred to as "elitism" here)? Whether I was or wasn't here as long as someone else means nothing in the present. That was then, and this is now, so regardless of what you believe this forum was "intended" to be, we are dealing with the current conditions and what's best for this I/A now. I'm truly sorry this forum isn't what some think it should be, but IMO this forum should serve the greater interests of the majority of competitive archers, not just a minority group of competitive archers that may or may not have higher "credentials"


Because it's the truth. Nothing more. Read into it what you will, that is what was decided in the beginning. It was not a perception thing.

Don't make this about me. There are many others here that remember the same thing. Not all agreed with it then, and a select few, (that would've been great assets to this forum) said it would never work because of the very thing that is happening here, and they have stayed away. Turns out they were correct. If they are reading this now, yes Mike and Tony, you were right. (and a few others)


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> Because it's the truth. Nothing more. Read into it what you will, that is what was decided in the beginning. It was not a perception thing.
> 
> Don't make this about me. There are many others here that remember the same thing. Not all agreed with it then, and a select few, (that would've been great assets to this forum) said it would never work because of the very thing that is happening here, and they have stayed away. Turns out they were correct. If they are reading this now, yes Mike and Tony, you were right. (and a few others)


This actually brings up a question related to the topic, then: clearly the original purpose for the forum was a failure - so now the next natural question is, was that failure for good reasons or bad ones? 

In either case, why did it break down into an "invasion of the noobs" and undesirable topic initiations in the first place? It's like looking at your shot - to fix a problem you first have to ask what exactly went wrong and why? And secondarily, because it failed is it necessarily a good idea to try to resurrect it again? We all know the definition of insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results - could that be the case with this current impulse to make I/A exclusive again?

This is maybe 10% rhetorical, but the other 90% of my purpose here is genuine curiosity. What do ya'll think?

DM


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

dmacey said:


> This actually brings up a question related to the topic, then: clearly the original purpose for the forum was a failure - so now the next natural question is, was that failure for good reasons or bad ones?
> 
> In either case, why did it break down into an "invasion of the noobs" and undesirable topic initiations in the first place? It's like looking at your shot - to fix a problem you first have to ask what exactly went wrong and why? And secondarily, because it failed is it necessarily a good idea to try to resurrect it again? We all know the definition of insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results - could that be the case with this current impulse to make I/A exclusive again?
> 
> ...


Actually a very good post. You are correct. I think the assumptions come from both sides. the carrying on is just human nature, and the "good guys vs. bad guys" routine.

But then who says its a failure? You? Two or three others? What if there are more people that agree that it should be kept more advanced and "noob" questions should be chased away?

What if the few that are among the "elitist" don't care if there are a bunch of people posting, and would rather see two quality posts a week than 15 different "What length stabs should I get?" threads?

Its all relative I suppose.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

montigre said:


> Good gravy, dmacey, is it even possible for you to interact with someone else without jumping into an argument with them?? Why did you even have to post this except in some banal effort to shield your own obvious insecurities? Please stop blatantly attacking people on this site because they do not line up behind your ideas.
> 
> 
> 
> If genuinely you wish to ask this question, have the intestinal fortitude to stand on your own two feet and start your own thread and stop crapping on this one. Thank you very much!!


Perhaps one should actually think about the content of their posts before inserting foot in mouth...


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

nestly said:


> Whether your characterization of what was "intended" is accurate or not, we've clearly moved to a different place now. Chastising someone for posting in the "wrong forum" isn't usually well received and there's ample evidence that it should either end or be done more tactfully than how it's currently being done. Someone gets offended every time it happens, if not the OP, then the person suggesting the topic should be moved when they're "taken to the cleaners". (see the first post in this topic for an example of the latter) Again, since only the Moderator can move it, why not just eliminate all the public fighting about whether a topic should or shouldn't be moved and leave it up to the person(s) who are actually able to move it?
> 
> *I'll go along with tactfully, but I still have ZERO problems with someone POLITELY suggesting that a thread might better be suited for another forum (i.e. gear, or colors, etc).
> Simply stating: "This thread might be better off in gen pop", should not be considered offensive. It's the opinion of a person, not an indictment.*
> ...


He was simply stating a fact that you might not have known. He didn't say you weren't inferior. His statement would seem accurate, taking offense to that is what gets these issues started.

We ALL need to quit assuming the intentions of people. and just read the words they put there.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

dmacey said:


> This actually brings up a question related to the topic, then: clearly the original purpose for the forum was a failure - so now the next natural question is, was that failure for good reasons or bad ones?
> 
> In either case, why did it break down into an "invasion of the noobs" and undesirable topic initiations in the first place? It's like looking at your shot - to fix a problem you first have to ask what exactly went wrong and why? And secondarily, because it failed is it necessarily a good idea to try to resurrect it again? We all know the definition of insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results - could that be the case with this current impulse to make I/A exclusive again?
> 
> ...


I honestly do not see the the original purpose of this forum was not, and is not a failure. It might not be exactly what each individual wants, but the purpose is the same as when it was created, some of the process has evolved, but there isn't THAT much different than when we started.

The only thing in I/A that is exclusive (don't even consider that an accurate term) is the content of the threads. Being that they are for the most part geared to helping I/A archers share ideas, thoughts and information relevant to competition archery.

What went "wrong" or what "failed" is/was the perception that people would be able to read a post without insinuating some hidden meaning. Being informed that a topic doesn't fit this sub-forum is not elitist, just as asking how much to advance the top cam on a PCE XL would not fit in the Trad forum. People take offense to being informed that the post might be better served elsewhere.
Seems a LOT of people do not read the stickies (how many gear posts a day do I need to move LOL!). Reading them would go a long way in preventing these issues.

What HAS changes as a result of this thread is that there will be a little more weight in the moderating. Not quite iron fist, but more posts being deleted and less tolerance for off topic/insulting/trolling/argumentative posts.

Again as far as tact goes. something like "Thats a stupid question. You noobs don't belong here" will likely get an infraction (I have NEVER seen something like that here) Something like "this should probably go to Gen pop" should not be taken as insulting, but as one person's opinion on the suitability of the topic in question for this forum.


----------



## nestly (Apr 19, 2015)

I disagree with you on the highest level. What's the benefit of one member telling another they posted in the wrong place? They can't do anything about it at that point. If a mod decides to move it, then they'll know, but often the person suggesting the thread was posted in the wrong area was incorrect themselves and the mod doesn't move the topic. I've been a mod/admin on several different forums too and the same thing happens everywhere, there just isn't any benefit to it since it's entirely up to the discretion of the Moderator, and either way the OP knows whether or not they posted in the wrong area.

With regard to stating facts about what happened in the past or an archers previous accomplishments, I really have little interest. I could share a pretty impressive resume at state and national level competitions, but that all happened 2 decades ago. I don't flaunt it, and usually avoid mentioning it at all because I don't believe it's relevant in an internet forum. What I write in the message body is relevant (hopefully), and that's how I gauge other forum members as well. This would be a better place if everyone stopped boasting about what they know, now long they been here, who they know, obscure/outdated rules, etc. and just stood on the same level as everyone else and provided help when they can.


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> Actually a very good post. You are correct. I think the assumptions come from both sides. the carrying on is just human nature, and the "good guys vs. bad guys" routine.
> 
> But then who says its a failure? You? Two or three others? What if there are more people that agree that it should be kept more advanced and "noob" questions should be chased away?


_I_ think quite the opposite - I think this forum is a resounding success and the quality level of the information is very high, for all concerned. But I'm not talking about my opinion. Instead, something was judged as seriously wrong enough to have prompted montigre to introduce the topic of overhauling the forum, or at least constraining its content in a rather major way. And based on the complaint she has raised, as well as the agreement with the complaint coming from a pretty loud portion of the group, the intended purpose appears to have been a failure. You yourself lamented that it has failed to work a moment ago: " [some of original group]...said it would never work because of the very thing that is happening here, and they have stayed away. Turns out they were correct". 

So I'm kind of going by one portion of the general opinion, not necessarily mine, in proposing the possibility that it has failed.


> What if the few that are among the "elitist" don't care if there are a bunch of people posting, and would rather see two quality posts a week than 15 different "What length stabs should I get?" threads?
> Its all relative I suppose.


Ok, so do you regard that as a failure of the forum's original purpose? That it has devolved into what-stab-do-I-need and not the "quality" posts you had hoped for? If you do, do have any thoughts about _why_ that devolution happened?

DM


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

EPLC said:


> Perhaps one should actually think about the content of their posts before inserting foot in mouth...


I can't find the post in the forum now, but I don't understand her question & rant that follows it. I thought argument and debate was our purpose here? She did ask us to discuss this matter after all. 

DM


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Now I see the problem. We in the past have had posts like this for members to help steer the direction of the forum. This is not new and not a major event.
A member had a concern and voiced it, asking the rest for input on a solution.

Slight changes are being made.

This has always been accepted in this forum as SOP. We just haven't had one in a while


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

Mahly said:


> Now I see the problem. We in the past have had posts like this for members to help steer the direction of the forum. This is not new and not a major event.
> A member had a concern and voiced it, asking the rest for input on a solution.
> 
> Slight changes are being made.
> ...


Well the OP isn't exactly conciliatory in her original post in the thread; in fact it's full of what could be considered demeaning phrases like "riddled with.. [such and such]", "moderation has become lax", and "...novices frequenting this site for a free ride from the more experienced members" and so forth. So she didn't do that great of a job of presenting herself as merely information-seeking and objective, as she claims herself to be. 
I think that's partly responsible for the side arguments, in particular the suspicion that an effort to shuttle in restrictions on the content was underneath it all....

DM


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

dmacey said:


> I can't find the post in the forum now, but I don't understand her question & rant that follows it. I thought argument and debate was our purpose here? She did ask us to discuss this matter after all. DM


Debate and discussion are the purpose of this forum and of this thread, but not argument, no matter how it may be sugar-coated. This forum was created over a year ago (thanks subconsciously) by I/A archers for the benefit of I/A archers to serve as a means to communicate primarily among themselves about competitive shooting and to discuss/debate steps for performance improvement with the caveat that there would also be a strong measure of self-moderation. 

Now a handful of disgruntled new members to AT (some with 2015 join dates) or members who recently joined this forum who were not present during the formative months feel a need or a desire to turn it into another facet of Gen Pop under the premise of "archers helping archers". That was not the original mission statement of this forum and I do not believe that has changed over the months since its inception.

I have personally seen people repost their questions in the appropriate forum after being informed by one of the original members that their post may be better suited somewhere else along with a brief explanation as to why or to continue posting on their post after it had been moved by Mod. Again, it is just a handful, of mostly newer members who do not understand the unique construct of this forum who take these statements or the fact that their post was moved personally and get all bent out of shape shouting "elitism" to the ends of the earth. Like Mahly stated, if these same people would not take these suggestions personally or would take the time to read the highlighted stickies at the top of the page, a good percentage of these problems would cease to exist.


----------



## GRIMWALD (Sep 28, 2012)

dmacey said:


> Well the OP isn't exactly conciliatory in her original post in the thread; in fact it's full of what could be considered demeaning phrases like "riddled with.. [such and such]", "moderation has become lax", and "...novices frequenting this site for a free ride from the more experienced members" and so forth. So she didn't do that great of a job of presenting herself as merely information-seeking and objective, as she claims herself to be.
> I think that's partly responsible for the side arguments, in particular the suspicion that an effort to shuttle in restrictions on the content was underneath it all....
> 
> DM


LOL!!!
This is also how I understood the original post. She stated her objections to how the Sub-forum was being moderated and was looking for support from other members. 
It's the old story of the tail wanting to wag the dog. My first thought upon reading her post was that she should have sent the post as a PM directly to moderator and not aired her frustration in an open forum.
It, after all, is not on topic for the Sub-forum header. LOL!!!

GRIM


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

nestly said:


> I disagree with you on the highest level. What's the benefit of one member telling another they posted in the wrong place? They can't do anything about it at that point. If a mod decides to move it, then they'll know, but often the person suggesting the thread was posted in the wrong area was incorrect themselves and the mod doesn't move the topic. I've been a mod/admin on several different forums too and the same thing happens everywhere, there just isn't any benefit to it since it's entirely up to the discretion of the Moderator, and either way the OP knows whether or not they posted in the wrong area.
> 
> With regard to stating facts about what happened in the past or an archers previous accomplishments, I really have little interest. I could share a pretty impressive resume at state and national level competitions, but that all happened 2 decades ago. I don't flaunt it, and usually avoid mentioning it at all because I don't believe it's relevant in an internet forum. What I write in the message body is relevant (hopefully), and that's how I gauge other forum members as well. This would be a better place if everyone stopped boasting about what they know, now long they been here, who they know, obscure/outdated rules, etc. and just stood on the same level as everyone else and provided help when they can.


I don't see and haven't seen anywhere stating that "pedigree" has ever been made a consideration of worthiness of posting. Only topics. I'm not sure where this is coming from. If it has to do with specific arguments between members then sure, there may be some interest in where the arguments stem from. For example: If I say I do something specific to enable holding it in the middle, and you say its BS because NO ONE can hold it in the middle, and I ask you your average Vegas scores, it can tell a lot. If you shoot low 290s and I shoot 299-300 avg, it becomes apparent as to why you believe it can not be done. This was very common with one particular member that was banned from here a while back. Understanding where you come from tells a lot when you choose to tell another person they are wrong.

Add to that the fact that I don't remember anyone ever boasting of scores to establish dominance in any situation. This fallacy has become an enigma with this place, and I believe it is unwarranted.




dmacey said:


> Ok, so do you regard that as a failure of the forum's original purpose? That it has devolved into what-stab-do-I-need and not the "quality" posts you had hoped for? If you do, do have any thoughts about _why_ that devolution happened?
> 
> DM


It's only a failure if we let it go to basic discussions. Then it is nothing different than the general archery forum, and that is the reason it was created in the first place.....to be different. To be held to higher standards.

As you can see, the moderator has confirmed this.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Perhaps it could have been written more tactfully, but she is correct about the history and intent of the sub forum.

Why allow these threads in this forum? Why not just PM a mod and ask for a change?

1) no mid is going to alter the functionality of the group based on one person's PM.
We ask all members to give input. Otherwise we would be changing the forum to whatever the last PM wanted.

2) This forum didn't even have a mod at first, it was, as mentioned, self modded. Of course 100% self modded didn't quite work.

3) there is use in self moderation if for no other reason than to help inform members new to the forum without everyone needing to get a PM from a mod, or multiple threads moved due to ignorance of the purpose of the forum


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

GRIMWALD said:


> LOL!!!
> This is also how I understood the original post. She stated her objections to how the Sub-forum was being moderated and was looking for support from other members.
> It's the old story of the tail wanting to wag the dog. My first thought upon reading her post was that she should have sent the post as a PM directly to moderator and not aired her frustration in an open forum.
> It, after all, is not on topic for the Sub-forum header. LOL!!!
> ...


See below. _edit - and the above post_



Mahly said:


> Now I see the problem. We in the past have had posts like this for members to help steer the direction of the forum. This is not new and not a major event.
> A member had a concern and voiced it, asking the rest for input on a solution.
> 
> Slight changes are being made.
> ...


----------



## GRIMWALD (Sep 28, 2012)

Mahly said:


> Perhaps it could have been written more tactfully, but she is correct about the history and intent of the sub forum.
> 
> Why allow these threads in this forum? Why not just PM a mod and ask for a change?
> 
> ...


I agree, no single PM will warrant attention but I just checked and they have 29 members of their private group. If the PM was signed by all 29 members then it would have merited a discussion or at least attention from someone in control. It is my opinion and only my opinion that this discussion should have been directed elsewhere.

GRIM


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> It's only a failure if we let it go to basic discussions. Then it is nothing different than the general archery forum, and that is the reason it was created in the first place.....to be different. To be held to higher standards.
> 
> As you can see, the moderator has confirmed this.


Have you considered the possibility that this isn't the right approach? Maybe it's not tenable to try to exclude "basic discussions" and enforce "higher standards" (at least not without concrete definitions and guidelines). And haven't there been suggestions about why this may not be tenable in this thread? For example, how is "basic discussion" defined? what are these "higher standards" exactly? Is it an enforceable concept? Perhaps it's like the definition of an "intermediate" or "advanced" archer, on which there seems to be no workable consensus? 

Just throwing the questions out there.

DM


----------



## nestly (Apr 19, 2015)

Seems there is an assumption here that returning to being "*a means to communicate primarily among themselves about competitive shooting*" is the direction this forum should take.
I think there's a strong case that the original intent may not have been the panacea it's being portrayed as. 
I will point out that not long ago there was a poll about setting numerical standards for "intermediate" and "advanced" and while voting was low in general, the one category opposed to setting standards of any type received more votes than all the other categories that advocated setting some sort of standard combined. In other words, the number of archers that supported communicating among "themselves" is pretty small, and a minority of those who participated in the poll. You already have exclusivity in your by_invitation_only group where IMO, the overall content isn't any higher level than it is here in I/A, and yet you still feel the need to create topics in that group specifically designed to belittle and degrade the I/A members that have no opportunity to defend themselves because your refuse them access. IMO, that type of ridicule shouldn't be permitted at AT, including "groups", and it's a distinctly unprofessional activity.

I would suggest that while that group seems to be satisfying some who wish not to get too close to regular competitive archers, it would be unhealthy for I/A both in terms of perception and participation to try to restrict this forum to a similar group that you've already invited to join that group.

To be perfectly honest, I believe this forum would be better if all those in that group would just stop posting here. The sad reality is that it's become so petty that the good information from that groups members, is far less than the whining and complaining about posts that don't live up to your standards. There's way more "intermediate" archers that use I/A than "advanced" archers and there ALWAYS will be... at least until you run them all off....  

Like I said before, this forum is basically fine except for the in-fighting. If we all become more tolerant of each other, this forum will get better, not by becoming less tolerant.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

dmacey said:


> Have you considered the possibility that this isn't the right approach? Maybe it's not tenable to try to exclude "basic discussions" and enforce "higher standards" (at least not without concrete definitions and guidelines). And haven't there been suggestions about why this may not be tenable in this thread? For example, how is "basic discussion" defined? what are these "higher standards" exactly? Is it an enforceable concept? Perhaps it's like the definition of an "intermediate" or "advanced" archer, on which there seems to be no workable consensus?
> 
> Just throwing the questions out there.
> 
> DM


You bet I've considered those things. And trust me, if it weren't for the silent majority that contact me through PMs saying "keep up the good fight", I'd have been gone long ago. Remember I'm a giver of information here. Right or wrong I have shared a lot of things in my learning progress that have helped a lot of people.


----------



## subconsciously (Aug 22, 2009)

We should all meet at Champions Sports Bar right around the corner from convention center at National Indoors in Louisville and talk about it. I'll buy the first round.


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

To explain the phrase you quoted without complete understanding many, many times novice shooters have come to this forum with pretty basic shooting or form questions and have been recommended by the consensus to seek the appraisal of a certified coach for their issue(s). This was nearly always followed by a bevy of excuses of how far a coach is from them (usually within 1 hour) or I don't have money for that now, or I'm just starting out, etc. In this regard, they were seeking to glean a magical tidbit from the more experienced shooters here while expending no effort on their part. 

This is not demeaning in the least, but an accurate description of stone cold truth. :wink:


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> You bet I've considered those things. And trust me, if it weren't for the silent majority that contact me through PMs saying "keep up the good fight", I'd have been gone long ago. Remember I'm a giver of information here. Right or wrong I have shared a lot of things in my learning progress that have helped a lot of people.


Well we've got quite a sizable silent majority on the keep-AT-free side too, some of whom have offered the same "keep up the good fight" encouragement to me via PM as well. So it would seem we have two majorities here and not just the one side of the debate that you suspect is the only majority. 

So it might be good for you to reconsider, and maybe a little more carefully this time. For sure, the frequency with which this comes up, cycles and ends the same way every time, should be food for thought about abandoning this approach as a probable failure and going with something else.

DM


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

dmacey said:


> Well we've got quite a sizable silent majority on the keep-AT-free side too, some of whom have offered the same "keep up the good fight" encouragement to me via PM as well. So it would seem we have two majorities here and not just the one side of the debate that you suspect only you occupy.
> 
> So it might be good for you to reconsider, and maybe a little more carefully this time. For sure, the frequency with which this comes up, cycles and ends the same way every time, should be food for thought about abandoning this approach and going with something else.
> 
> DM


Yeah.....no. You're not selling that to anyone. :lol:


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> Yeah.....no. You're not selling that to anyone. :lol:


Ditto.

DM


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

That's their private group.
Here, we don't have a private group, so forum suggestions are public.

For the rest. Before you post something off topic, ask yourself " can this be handled in a PM?".

Future off topic posts (and replies to such will be deleted)

Edited: some of those will be getting deleted now.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

cbrunson said:


> Yeah.....no. You're not selling that to anyone. :lol:


True story. ^^^

Back to topic. It seems quite simple to me, abide by the guidelines set forth in the "sticky" and all should be well. :cheers:


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

nestly said:


> Seems there is an assumption here that returning to being "*a means to communicate primarily among themselves about competitive shooting*" is the direction this forum should take.
> I think there's a strong case that the original intent may not have been the panacea it's being portrayed as.
> I will point out that not long ago there was a poll about setting numerical standards for "intermediate" and "advanced" and while voting was low in general, the one category opposed to setting standards of any type received more votes than all the other categories that advocated setting some sort of standard combined. In other words, the number of archers that supported communicating among "themselves" is pretty small, and a minority of those who participated in the poll. You already have exclusivity in your by_invitation_only group where IMO, the overall content isn't any higher level than it is here in I/A, and yet you still feel the need to create topics in that group specifically designed to belittle and degrade the I/A members that have no opportunity to defend themselves because your refuse them access. IMO, that type of ridicule shouldn't be permitted at AT, including "groups", and it's a distinctly unprofessional activity.
> 
> ...


Threads like this one are why we keep coming here:

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=3543641

There are some names I haven’t seen before on that thread that genuinely want to discover better ways to do things or at least something new to try. There you will see a lot of supportive communication, where many people add to it their own spin on things. That is what it should be.

I noticed you haven’t commented there, yet you have taken up the fight on this thread. Should we really be questioning each other’s true intent?


----------



## nestly (Apr 19, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> I noticed you haven’t commented there, yet you have taken up the fight on this thread. Should we really be questioning each other’s true intent?


Been very busy since coming back from Vegas. Been at the archery club every day since then except today doing leagues and maintenance. This is one of the first and only topics I've read here in the last 2 weeks, so don't read anything into it other than that. Those trying to reduce "I/A" to just "A" have my full attention, and I'll be here fighting against them as long and as hard as time permits. 

And yeah, I know you'll disagree with my assessment of the situation, and I'll disagree with your disagreement.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

nestly said:


> Been very busy since coming back from Vegas. Been at the archery club every day since then except today doing leagues and maintenance. This is one of the first and only topics I've read here in the last 2 weeks, so don't read anything into it other than that. Those trying to reduce "I/A" to just "A" have my full attention, and I'll be here fighting against them as long and as hard as time permits.
> 
> And yeah, I know you'll disagree with my assessment of the situation, and I'll disagree with your disagreement.


At least we are in agreement there. 

How'd Vegas go? 

I know the routine with the club.


----------



## nestly (Apr 19, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> At least we are in agreement there.
> 
> How'd Vegas go?
> 
> I know the routine with the club.


First trip, and it was rough. I could make a bunch of excuses from having to dig out from a record snowfall two days before leaving, to the airline baggage handlers re-tuning my bow for me (which they did, thank you very much), to a poor decision to get a massage (a legit massage) from an Amazon woman with hands of steel the night before the first round, but ultimately it really came down to me just shooting poorly. 
Live and learn, I'm already planning to get revenge in that town next year.


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

Anonymous screen names don't help. You can't see whom you are actively dealing with and what v they are or have accomplished 

I have no idea whom Mahly is. He is in the same state as me, He shot a Strother which I helped run the pro staff of. I know several top pros on his side of the state and shoot with them enough. 

Nobody knows whom Mahly is when I ask.....so just who are you anyways. Its bugged me for 2 years... .lol


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

nestly said:


> First trip, and it was rough. I could make a bunch of excuses from having to dig out from a record snowfall two days before leaving, to the airline baggage handlers re-tuning my bow for me (which they did, thank you very much), to a poor decision to to get a massage from an Amazon woman with hands of steel the night before the first round, but ultimately it really came down to me just shooting poorly.
> Live and learn, I'm already planning to get revenge in that town next year.


I'll be there for my first one next year. I expect a struggle, but also intend to hit everything between now and then I can to build up confidence.

Sorry for the off topic......we can go back to arguing now...


----------



## nestly (Apr 19, 2015)

Garceau said:


> Anonymous screen names don't help. You can't see whom you are actively dealing with and what v they are or have accomplished


I disagree for reasons I've stated earlier in this topic. IMO, neither current nor past accomplishments automatically qualify anyone to give advice. You can be dumb as a box of rocks and still kill the heck out of the X-ring. Sometimes Pro's say dumb stuff, and sometimes a "newbie" offers up a real gem. 

Read the message and disregard who posted it... if it seems like sound advice, use it for what it's worth, and if it sounds like bunk, treat it accordingly. If you're a halfway decent competitor, you should be able to tell the difference.


----------



## Garceau (Sep 3, 2010)

nestly said:


> I disagree for reasons I've stated earlier in this topic. IMO, neither current nor past accomplishments automatically qualify anyone to give advice. You can be dumb as a box of rocks and still kill the heck out of the X-ring. Sometimes Pro's say dumb stuff, and sometimes a "newbie" offers up a real gem.
> 
> Read the message and disregard who posted it... if it seems like sound advice, use it for what it's worth, and if it sounds like bunk, treat it accordingly. If you're a halfway decent competitor, you should be able to tell the difference.


Sometimes is an understatement .....lol

Just kidding. 

I don't come here much anymore. Just hasn't been much that caught my interests for varying reasons. 

I feel I'm on the bottom end of intermediate some days. Others even lower !


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Garceau said:


> Anonymous screen names don't help. You can't see whom you are actively dealing with and what v they are or have accomplished
> 
> I have no idea whom Mahly is. He is in the same state as me, He shot a Strother which I helped run the pro staff of. I know several top pros on his side of the state and shoot with them enough.
> 
> Nobody knows whom Mahly is when I ask.....so just who are you anyways. Its bugged me for 2 years... .lol


I'm no one special. I've likely shot with some of the same guys.
I"be been shooting target archery in one form or another for 32 years.
I'd be what I call intermediate, what some around here call advanced, and what top guys would call dead money LOL!
I've been a member of AT for going on I think 14 years.
Most tournaments I shoot are more local shoots.
I guess I would be a good example of someone who doesn't have a lot of national ranking, but I certainly wouldn't say a beginner.

I learn as much as I can from the TRUELY advanced archers here, and at the club. As far as this thread is concerned, I try not to post anything that I don't think would be of interest to I/A shooters... but I'll post that in other sub forums.
I've helped a lot of beginners get started, and some intermediate shooters with what I know.
My chief role here is perhaps a voice of reason, and chief button pusher 

I'd go on but it would both bore everyone here, and be more off topic than I like.


----------



## pwyrick (Feb 13, 2011)

When I started reading the I/A forum, I read the stickies. I just re-read them. Those of you who were "plank owners" of this forum had the understanding that the forum would be participant moderated. That is not stated anywhere in the "rules", unless that is stated somewhere that I just haven't seen. Now, my wife would say that I am unable to find a gallon of milk in a gallon sized refrigerator. So, its possible that I missed something. If I have please send me to the right place.
Having waited a long time to post in this thread (I kept telling myself, don't post), I'd like to suggest we do one of the following: 1) select a few of the "originals" to advise the moderator on unacceptable threads. Then the mod can make an informed decision. If the thread stays, then all of us should either decide to participate or not. or 2) read or don't read posts, contribute or don't contribute to posts, and stop judging each other. Then the mod can delete anything that is not part of the discussion of the topic or is not beneficial to this stated purpose of the forum. And under 2), this entire thread would be deleted, in my opinion. 
I'm fine with either approach, or a better option. I want to excel in archery. I've found some benefit to this forum. Now, I am growing tired of the fighting about the forum.


----------



## RCR_III (Mar 19, 2011)

pwyrick said:


> When I started reading the I/A forum, I read the stickies. I just re-read them. Those of you who were "plank owners" of this forum had the understanding that the forum would be participant moderated. That is not stated anywhere in the "rules", unless that is stated somewhere that I just haven't seen. Now, my wife would say that I am unable to find a gallon of milk in a gallon sized refrigerator. So, its possible that I missed something. If I have please send me to the right place.
> Having waited a long time to post in this thread (I kept telling myself, don't post), I'd like to suggest we do one of the following: 1) select a few of the "originals" to advise the moderator on unacceptable threads. Then the mod can make an informed decision. If the thread stays, then all of us should either decide to participate or not. or 2) read or don't read posts, contribute or don't contribute to posts, and stop judging each other. Then the mod can delete anything that is not part of the discussion of the topic or is not beneficial to this stated purpose of the forum. And under 2), this entire thread would be deleted, in my opinion.
> I'm fine with either approach, or a better option. I want to excel in archery. I've found some benefit to this forum. Now, I am growing tired of the fighting about the forum.


Agreed. And I was thinking earlier this afternoon on the delete this thread part. 

It's evolved into a debate between people who want to pick at a scab and stir the pot. Everything else seems to be talked out. 

Plus, it's become a running joke for others.


----------



## Mahly (Dec 18, 2002)

Well, as time has proven, cbrunson was on to something about 2 years ago.

In the Sticky on Target archery



cbrunson said:


> Maybe "sticky" this thread.


Sorry it took so long for me to realize it.
See updated sticky list.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

Mahly said:


> Well, as time has proven, cbrunson was on to something about 2 years ago.
> 
> In the Sticky on Target archery
> 
> ...


Huh? I don't think I've changed much from almost 2 years ago...

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2237233&p=1070011185#post1070011185


----------



## pwyrick (Feb 13, 2011)

Mahly said:


> Well, as time has proven, cbrunson was on to something about 2 years ago.
> 
> In the Sticky on Target archery
> 
> ...


Thanks. I'll read it.


----------



## cbrunson (Oct 25, 2010)

Mahly said:


> Well, as time has proven, cbrunson was on to something about 2 years ago.
> 
> In the Sticky on Target archery
> 
> ...


Its interesting to see how much some things have changed and others have not. 

.....and yes Sonny, you're still as confusing as ever. :lol:


----------



## dmacey (Mar 27, 2015)

cbrunson said:


> .....and yes Sonny, you're still as confusing as ever. :lol:


I think Sonny should be elected as the forum advisor to Mahly. He didn't become master of the universe by accident, you know. And I'm able to parse almost 97% of what he writes now... 

DM


----------



## Anarchist_Otter (Mar 26, 2013)

You must have a great view.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk


----------

