on_one_wheel wrote:Also can we somehow become a group where each member has proved that they are a genuine firearms owner before we can post ?
Can admin check our credentials by checking face book accounts, club memberships, license numbers, photo's of licenses...
Gwion wrote:Lots of newbies with little knowledge or exposure to firearms turn to forums for info and the obligatory, "this may be a stupid question, but...." posts.
Aster wrote:That kind of stuff is best managed by security experts like the firearm registries... *whistles conspicuously*
Aster wrote:Gwion wrote:Lots of newbies with little knowledge or exposure to firearms turn to forums for info and the obligatory, "this may be a stupid question, but...." posts.
And those are fine.
Everyone was a newbie once, and everyone has asked a 'dumb' question before.
Gwion wrote:Yep. My point exactly. Newbies wouldn't be able to 'prove' an interest in firearms.
It's pretty easy to tell the difference between a genuine newbie and some anti troll or complete moron.
Aster wrote:We have a basic approval process for newly registered members to filter out obvious spammers etc. but that's about where its effectiveness ends.
Notionally, some kind of vetting process for genuine involvement in the shooting community would be great, realistically though I don't think an effective screening process of this type could be done without asking for sensitive information and frankly having myself or the moderators be privy to, or responsible for any personal or identifying information of members is something I definitely do not want.
There are also the concerns around the information being stored or passing through the site. That kind of stuff is best managed by security experts like the firearm registries... *whistles conspicuously*
on_one_wheel wrote:How about a secret handshake
Title_II wrote:The middle finger tickle.
Kinda like when your cousin kisses you and throws in some tongue. Yikes!
brett1868 wrote:Title_II wrote:The middle finger tickle.
Kinda like when your cousin kisses you and throws in some tongue. Yikes!
Seems Tasmania may have been originally colonised by "The Great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania" and over time and lack of options grew to love their brothers and sisters just as much as their cousins.
Supaduke wrote:One of my favourites was the young fella that's "been shooting pistols for years, how do I get hold of some 30 round glock mags?"
/face palm
Wylie27 wrote:Or was from another nation.... don't forget we have international visitors too
Title_II wrote:I have a 32 round Glock mag. Never actually used it. I carried it loaded once and looked like an idiot LOL
But I had to buy it because Heck Yeah!
Now it just sits in a closet.
bentaz wrote:How many onions can i stockpile?
Title_II wrote:I have a 32 round Glock mag. Never actually used it. I carried it loaded once and looked like an idiot LOL
But I had to buy it because Heck Yeah!
Now it just sits in a closet.
Aster wrote:bladeracer wrote:Perhaps we should save those up in a forum of their own?
It's probably not a bad thing to remind our members that these wankers are always out to get us, rather than the mods keeping us insulated from it?
It's not a matter of insulating members, it's a matter of maintaining a high standard of content across the forum.
We intend this forum to be a resource, where new or returning visitors can land on any page and find accurate, useful information.
I understand the direction you're coming from, but maintaining an archive of content (even as an example of what not to do) which is erroneous, inflammatory or solely intended to provoke an illicit response, is not the ethos of this forum.
duncan61 wrote:Port Arthur has been discussed on this site but it was a while ago
Jandamurra wrote:If you wouldn't mind clueing me in on something, were all topics able to be viewed by non-members/ even when not signed in at one stage, or has this been introduced since this forum was established?
I'm also looking for the thread on the Port Arthur Massacre (PAM). Has it been removed, or have I just not seen it?
Jandamurra wrote:What does "inflammatory" even mean, as a reason to close a thread to comments or viewing? Surely the only thing that should be banned is incitement to violence.