Truth not allowed here

[Kbhillhunter]

TLDR

 

[Billy Goat]

I hate when I miss a good dumpster fire.


Likely for the benefit of everyone else tho.

 

[zacattack]

Now I really sad I missed the rest of yesterdays bird flu thread.

 

[Coldtrail]

This thread has really got me down a rabbit trail of deep thought & I didnt get much sleep last night.

Is there a lifestyle balance regarding $55 underwear in relation to days worn? I mean I can see if a guy is changing them daily then you are certainly living like a king, but at what point in wear are you back to poverty? 1 day? 1 week?. "A guy I know" has been known to perhaps overextend the normal recommended use of a pair of underwear during backcountry pursuits to the point it was just easier to throw them in the trash at a rest stop on the ride home, would this mean that person is overly wealthy? or poor?

Another obvious concern is the durability during the course of a wedgie, can you still get the waistband on a $55 pair of underwear to stretch up over an average sized man's head? If so, can it be removed safely, or is their likelihood of neck injury from increased durability? A neck injury in the backcountry can be catastrophic and we should know how to proceed with these $55 underwear being out there.

 

[Mosby]

I once drove from Western PA to Utah with some guys to go elk hunting. One guy in the group spent the entire week railing about "rich people"...especially on the drive out and back when he had a captive audience. Nothing was accomplished other than he seemed to enjoy making himself miserable. I killed an elk. He didn't. I never hunted with that group again.

Maybe its me but I don't think most people come here to discuss famine, pestilence, politics or advice on how to feed our families. For those that do, there is probably a better place for that than here. I vote every election cycle and I hunt and fish in between. I am of the opinion that whether you are arguing for/against or preaching to the choir, nothing is going to change including most people's opinion. Why bother. Getting a topic deleted doesn't make you William Wallace.

I have never understood why people are so concerned with what other people have. There is always going to be someone with more. Good for them. That's their business. I grew up with less. My dad gave me a couple cans of coins when I left home. It was all he had to give me. I borrowed money from my wife 37 years ago to buy her an engagement ring. I worked 6 to 7 days a week for many years to provide for my family. I am now retired; I still take care of my family and I get to spend my money on as a much "stupid shit" as I want. I earned it. No apologies from me.

 

[wytx]

Yep, 24 Hour Campfire is your site. kingston may send you a special welcome link too.

 

[MattB]

This thread has really got me down a rabbit trail of deep thought & I didnt get much sleep last night.

Is there a lifestyle balance regarding $55 underwear in relation to days worn? I mean I can see if a guy is changing them daily then you are certainly living like a king, but at what point in wear are you back to poverty? 1 day? 1 week?. "A guy I know" has been known to perhaps overextend the normal recommended use of a pair of underwear during backcountry pursuits to the point it was just easier to throw them in the trash at a rest stop on the ride home, would this mean that person is overly wealthy? or poor?

Another obvious concern is the durability during the course of a wedgie, can you still get the waistband on a $55 pair of underwear to stretch up over an average sized man's head? If so, can it be removed safely, or is their likelihood of neck injury from increased durability? A neck injury in the backcountry can be catastrophic and we should know how to proceed with these $55 underwear being out there.

Man, this thread has life-altering consequences.

 

[Red Letters]

Op, the general forum on 24 hourcampfire is where you want to go to talk about what you are referring too. You can go down a rabbithole there and get as crazy or argumentative as you want. The mods here bill the site as a gear forum with allowance for some other topics which is just fine. Ryan avery laid it out accurately. The mods here have been better than many other forums. They just want to stick to the topic of hunting and that is their right to do so.



@Ryan Avery . As far as whose truth? There is a federal board to determine what the truth is. It is under the law enforcement agency, department of homeland security. I would suggest you moderate your forum within the policies laid out by this agency. They have the most authoritative sources on what information is truthful.

Disinformation Governance Board - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Lol so true. Flat earthers and their damn videos. Here is one that poorly edited for your entertainment but its only 30 seconds. I agree that these absolute cooks like the OP are just conspiracy peddlers. I love making fun of them and their nutty theories. Can you believe they think the federal government and big techcompanies are conspiring? Truly alex jones stuff rofl.

As far as the people like the OP with the sky is falling attitude....its not as bad as you think. Cheer up man. Bear hunters in washington, hunters in california, and predator hunters in many other states will tell you that its not that bad.

Did you seriously just threaten the owners of this site

https://twitter.com/x/status/1520003460787163136

edit I’ll just put this in and try and avoid any back and forth.
When you just randomly tag the owner of the site to a thread he hasn't even posted in, to give him your unsolicited advice with links to a fed website laying out not so thinly veiled ramifications as to how they plan on enforcing this UN-constitutional BS? It sure seems pointed, compliance through intimidation.

 

[CJ19]

Did you seriously just threaten the owners of this site

https://twitter.com/x/status/1520003460787163136

edit I’ll just put this in and try and avoid any back and forth.
When you just randomly tag the owner of the site to a thread he hasn't even posted in, to give him your unsolicited advice with links to a fed website laying out not so thinly veiled ramifications as to how they plan on enforcing this UN-constitutional BS? It sure seems pointed, compliance through intimidation.

No. Not even remotely. Im sure the site admins will continue to administer the site as they see fit. I would not call suggesting anyone follow law enforcement policy a threat. Im sure the site admins can handle a ra dom person on the internet posting a wikipedia link. Besides that is new information having just come out in the last few days. Its not even clear most people have seen it.

And if that came across as such, it was not. The site admins here do a good job and thats not ass kissing. They are more than reasonable.

 

[tdhanses]

Did you seriously just threaten the owners of this site

https://twitter.com/x/status/1520003460787163136

edit I’ll just put this in and try and avoid any back and forth.
When you just randomly tag the owner of the site to a thread he hasn't even posted in, to give him your unsolicited advice with links to a fed website laying out not so thinly veiled ramifications as to how they plan on enforcing this UN-constitutional BS? It sure seems pointed, compliance through intimidation.

Start reading from the beginning, Ryan did post in it, specifically read post #25.

 

[roosiebull]

 

[CJ19]

View attachment 406272

Great meme. One of the better foil hat memes out there. Do you think hunters in washington are tinfoil hat wearers for thinking something other than science is leading the decisions of wildlife management agencies in that state? How about the decision to ban NR caribou hunters from certain units on federal land in alaska? Also, do you have any comment on how wildlife agencies are going to fit their management decisions in to a diversity, equity, and inclusion framework?

These are serious policy questions that we need to explore bc the agencies in charge of wildlife management in washington, oregon, california, new york, colorado, nevada, and some other states as well as federal agencies are having these discussions right now. Serious questions. Im genuinely interested on what ppl think on these issues and dont know how ppl think or feel.

 

[Wags]

The responses on here give me hope for America's future....

 

[Red Letters]

No. Not even remotely. Im sure the site admins will continue to administer the site as they see fit. I would not call suggesting anyone follow law enforcement policy a threat. Im sure the site admins can handle a ra dom person on the internet posting a wikipedia link. Besides that is new information having just come out in the last few days. Its not even clear most people have seen it.

And if that came across as such, it was not. The site admins here do a good job and thats not ass kissing. They are more than reasonable.

Gotcha, so you were just suggesting they follow the new guidelines set by the DHS department “ministry of truth.” So obviously you are of the opinion that the guy occupying 1600 can grant himself authority to tell a private company (the owners of this website in this case) what they are even allowed to talk about and what they are allowed to let their members talk about?
Maybe your could also explain to me how one of if not the biggest group of liars and crooks ever assembled are now suddenly purveyors of facts? R‘s and D’s, neither party has the market cornered of lies, politicians in general are liars and they are getting worse not better, save maybe Rand Paul.
And how exactly does this newly found authoritative power you seem to think they have jive with the 1st Amendment as far as the rest of society, media outlets, social media etc. are concerned?

 

[Wyobohunter]

Great meme. One of the better foil hat memes out there. Do you think hunters in washington are tinfoil hat wearers for thinking something other than science is leading the decisions of wildlife management agencies in that state? How about the decision to ban NR caribou hunters from certain units on federal land in alaska? Also, do you have any comment on how wildlife agencies are going to fit their management decisions in to a diversity, equity, and inclusion framework?

These are serious policy questions that we need to explore bc the agencies in charge of wildlife management in washington, oregon, california, new york, colorado, nevada, and some other states as well as federal agencies are having these discussions right now. Serious questions. Im genuinely interested on what ppl think on these issues and dont know how ppl think or feel.

The tinfoil hat meme was fitting for what the OP said. He said nothing about the issues you just introduced. Have a cookie and take a nap

Just messin’ with ya.

 

[CJ19]

Gotcha, so you were just suggesting they follow the new guidelines set by the DHS department “ministry of truth.” So obviously you are of the opinion that the guy occupying 1600 can grant himself authority to tell a private company (the owners of this website in this case) what they are even allowed to talk about and what they are allowed to let their members talk about?
Maybe your could also explain to me how one of if not the biggest group of liars and crooks ever assembled are now suddenly purveyors of facts? R‘s and D’s, neither party has the market cornered of lies, politicians in general are liars and they are getting worse not better, save maybe Rand Paul.
And how exactly does this newly found authoritative power you seem to think they have jive with the 1st Amendment as far as the rest of society, media outlets, social media etc. are concerned?

As far as i know, no new guidelines have been release by the agency yet in this regard. I wouldnt advise the admins on legal issues bc I m not a lawyer. I myself would carefully consider policies that would affect any hypothetical internet platform that i hypothetically operate once any guidance is released by said agency. I think myself and many other people share your concerns.

 

[roosiebull]

Great meme. One of the better foil hat memes out there. Do you think hunters in washington are tinfoil hat wearers for thinking something other than science is leading the decisions of wildlife management agencies in that state? How about the decision to ban NR caribou hunters from certain units on federal land in alaska? Also, do you have any comment on how wildlife agencies are going to fit their management decisions in to a diversity, equity, and inclusion framework?

These are serious policy questions that we need to explore bc the agencies in charge of wildlife management in washington, oregon, california, new york, colorado, nevada, and some other states as well as federal agencies are having these discussions right now. Serious questions. Im genuinely interested on what ppl think on these issues and dont know how ppl think or feel.

Easy seabiscuit!!!

What does that have to do with the topic of this thread? And what is your solution?

Some things are best kept off of forums (especially forums related to a pretty specific thing like this forum is)

The OP’s “truth” topic has no chance to turn into anything useful here, that’s why some topics aren’t allowed… a history of the same topics turning into the same shit shows ending in no changed minds, no progress, and extra work for the mods to clean up and close such threads… let’s just skip all that and keep it hunting related… given it’s a hunting site.

There are endless platforms for rants and changing the world… lots of places to spread your political wings… I’m glad it’s not allowed here, it just divides the members for no reason… email your elected officials, any of us on the west coast have plenty of people to argue with if you want to converse with an irrational liberal… put a trump sticker in your back window, good conversation starter at the gas station if anyone will talk to you.

Those topics here don’t solve any issues, just creates arguments… if that wasn’t the case, they would be accepted here.

What you mentioned is a different thing and are discussed here, but even at that, it seems nothing more than venting, I have not seen those conversations on forums have any useful outcome, that’s our fault for not taking advantage of the potential tool forums could be.

Some entertaining memes always though, so it’s not all bad

 

[roosiebull]

@JJJ who's truth, yours or Rokslides?


There are three ways to run a forum, total moderation, moderate moderation, and no moderation. We are in the moderate moderation camp because we find it works the best for 99% of the conversations. What you need to do is find a forum with no moderation... let me know how that works out for ya.

There are lots of us who appreciate how you guys run this forum, I think it’s the right balance to keep us acting like emotional teenagers+ rather than 5 year olds with no moderation….

One more thing… we can’t handle the truth!!!

 

[Marbles]

Easy seabiscuit!!!

What does that have to do with the topic of this thread? And what is your solution?

Some things are best kept off of forums (especially forums related to a pretty specific thing like this forum is)

The OP’s “truth” topic has no chance to turn into anything useful here, that’s why some topics aren’t allowed… a history of the same topics turning into the same shit shows ending in no changed minds, no progress, and extra work for the mods to clean up and close such threads… let’s just skip all that and keep it hunting related… given it’s a hunting site.

There are endless platforms for rants and changing the world… lots of places to spread your political wings… I’m glad it’s not allowed here, it just divides the members for no reason… email your elected officials, any of us on the west coast have plenty of people to argue with if you want to converse with an irrational liberal… put a trump sticker in your back window, good conversation starter at the gas station if anyone will talk to you.

Those topics here don’t solve any issues, just creates arguments… if that wasn’t the case, they would be accepted here.

What you mentioned is a different thing and are discussed here, but even at that, it seems nothing more than venting, I have not seen those conversations on forums have any useful outcome, that’s our fault for not taking advantage of the potential tool forums could be.

Some entertaining memes always though, so it’s not all bad

I think @CJ19 is trying to imply that we are all doomed and this site supports the elimination of free speach. There is no other reason why someone would latch onto a name and imply it will govern speach on forums when the only descriptions of its mission so far is dealing with information encouraging illegal immigration and that from a beligerant state.

 

[CJ19]

I think @CJ19 is trying to imply that we are all doomed and this site supports the elimination of free speach. There is no other reason why someone would latch onto a name and imply it will govern speach on forums when the only descriptions of its mission so far is dealing with information encouraging illegal immigration and that from a beligerant state.

Great post. Really nailed it. Dont forget they support the fake moon landing which was all a cover up for the jrk assassination.